
Class; J-j ^/ D i 



BooL 



9^ 



Copyright N".- 



CQ££RIGI£r DEFOSm 



AMERICAN DEMOCRACY 

AND 

ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 



AMERICAN DEMOCRACY 

AND 

ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 



BY 
SIDNEY L. GULICK, D.D. 

SECBETABT 07 THE COMHI3BION ON DTTEBXATIONAI. JUSTICE AKD OOODWHX, AMD OF 

THB COHiaSBION ON BELATI0N9 WITH THE OBIinn', OF THE FKDERAL 

COUNCIL OF THB CHUBCHES OF CHBIST IN AUKBICA 

AUTHOR OF " EVOLUTION OF THE JAPANESE, SOCIAL AND P8TCHIC," " THE WHITE PEBIL IN 
THE FAB EAST," "THE AMEBICAN JAPANESE PBOBLBM," " WOBKING WOMEN OF 
JAPAN," "AMEEICA and THE ORIENT." IN JAPANESE : " SHINSHINKWABON " 
(cosine EVOLUTION), "JINBUI SHINKWABOn" (HUMAN EVOLU- 
TION), " KWAGAKU GAIBON" (gENEBAL DISCUSSIONS AND 
A CLASSIFICATION OF HXmAN KNOWLEDGE), 
"DBUTSCH SHrNQAKU BITAKU SHl" 
(SKETCH OF THE HI3TOBT OF 
GEBUAN THEOLOOT) 



NEW YORK 

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 

1918 



COPTRIOHT, 1918, BT 

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 



Published February, 1918 



MAR 19 1918 




'•1 



&' 



©CI.A492638 



CONTENTS 

y 

PART I— POLITICAL 

CHAPTER PAGE 

I. The New Asia and Its Significance for America 3 

II. Japan: Her Problems and Claims ....... 14 

III. China: Our Treaties and Our Treatment ... 30 

IV. An Historical Sketch of Legislation Dealing 

WITH Immigration 49 

V. An Historical Sketch of Legislation Dealing 

WITH Naturalization 54 

Vl. Democracy and Citizenship 80 

VII. The Rights and Duties of Nations 91 

VIII. A Policy and a Programme for Constructive 

Immigration Legislation 105 

IX. Criticisms Criticised 122 

PART II— STATISTICAL 

X, Chinese in the United States 137 

XL Japanese in the United States 162 

XII. Situation on the Pacific Coast 188 

XIII. Situation in the Hawaiian Islands 220 

XIV. Conclusion 252 



INTRODUCTION 

The American Japanese problem remains un- 
solved. Diplomatic correspondence over the ques- 
tions at issue between the two governments came 
to a stop in the summer of 1914, neither being satis- 
fied with the position assumed by the other, and 
neither seeing what the next step should be to reach 
a position satisfactory to both. 

Important writers of both lands have continued 
vigorously to discuss the international situation. 
In each land there are those who denounce the 
alleged weakness of their own government in deal- 
ing with the asserted aggressive deeds and policies 
of the other. Such writers, however, are danger- 
ous guides. Urging our "right" and denouncing 
their "wrong" does not help to solve actual prob- 
lems. In spite of the fury of their fine writing and 
their hysterical exhortations they make no impor- 
tant contribution to the solution of the problems 
or to the establishment of permanently right and 
mutually satisfactory relations. 

On account of the strained relations that devel- 
oped between America and Japan in 1913 over the 
California Anti-AHen Land Law, the Federal Coun- 
cil of the Churches of Christ in America, responding 



viii INTRODUCTION 

to appeals from missionaries in Japan, established 
a Commission on Relations with Japan "to study 
the whole question in its relation to the teaching of 
Christ," and "to seek to rally the Christian forces 
of the United States for the solution of the problem, 
and for the promotion of such measures as are in 
accord with the highest standards of Christian states- 
manship." 

The writer, who had the honor to present to the 
Federal Council the memorial of the missionaries, 
was made the representative of the commission, 
has been given prolonged extension of his furlough, 
and under the auspices of the commission of the 
Federal Council has had unusual opportunity for 
the study and presentation of the question in every 
part of the country. 

His twenty-six years of missionary service in 
Japan, and this experience in the United States, in 
which he has met not only chiychmen but large 
numbers of business men in chambers of commerce 
and trade boards, as well as representatives of 
organized labor, particularly on the Pacific coast, 
have led the writer to certain definite cojiclusions 
as to the problem itself, and also as to the true 
methods for its solution. These conclusions have 
been presented in various volumes, pamphlets, and 
magazine articles, which present, of course, his own 
views and convictions, and for which the commis- 
sion of the Federal Council is not responsible. 



INTRODUCTION ix 

The discussions of this volume are strictly limited 
to the field selected for consideration; namely, the 
legislation which should now be enacted by Congress 
in order that America may do her part in setting 
right our relations with the Far East. Americans 
should reaUze that modern Asia has rendered not 
only obsolete but dangerous any policy that ignores 
their problems, needs, and essential rights. 

The only real solution of the new problem that 
has been set for the entire world by the new Japan 
and the new China is to be found in our adoption of 
a new Oriental poHcy and programme. That policy 
and programme should embody two fundamental 
principles: 

While, on the one hand, it should provide real protec- 
tion for the Pacific coast States from the dangers of 
excessive Asiatic immigration; 

It should also, on the other hand, give to Asiatics the 
same courtesy of treatment and the same equality of 
rights as America readily accords to all other people, 
whether they come from Europe, Africa, or South 
America. 

To the casual thinker these two principles may 
seem to be not merely incompatible but positively 
contradictory. In point of fact, however, they are 
not necessarily either incompatible or contradictory. 

The policy that embodies both these essentials 
may be summed up in two principal propositions: 

First. All immigration should be regulated hy the 



X INTRODUCTION 

principle that America shall admit only so many 
immigrants from any particular people as she can 
genuinely Americanize. 

Second. Privileges of citizenship should be given to 
every individual who personally qualifies, regardless 
of his race. 

Regulation of all immigration on a percentage 
principle affords the protection needed by the Pacific 
coast, and indeed by the entire country, from an 
excessive immigration from any land. 

The granting of naturaHzation to every individual 
who qualifies removes all humiliating race discrimi- 
nation, which discrimination is particularly resented 
just now by Japan. 

The present volume seeks to present the various 
facts and factors involved in the new world-situa- 
tion, and to consider carefully the various ques- 
tions that arise when one tries to think through the 
pros and cons of the above proposals. 

For example, the student of the subject needs to 
know much about modern Japan, her problems and 
her claims, for only so can he understand why 
America cannot carry out international poKcies as 
though Japan were not on the map. He needs to 
know, moreover, not only the new China that is 
looming up, but also the facts of our treatment of 
China and the Chinese during the past decades. 
These subjects are therefore presented in Chapters 
I, II, and III. Other chapters show how our deal- 



INTRODUCTION xi 

ings with Asiatics permanently residing in our coun- 
try have inevitable relations with our ideals of de- 
mocracy — with the very foundations, indeed; of our 
government and of our institutions. 

The student needs still further to know in some 
detail the history of our federal legislation dealing 
with immigration and naturalization, and with 
their effects on Asiatic immigration. He needs also 
to know the character of the Chinese and Japanese 
permanently settled in the United States. Atten- 
tion is therefore given to these subjects. 

What, moreover, are the facts as to the processes 
of Americanization that have been moulding our 
Oriental population both on the Pacific coast and 
in Hawaii ? These matters are discussed in Chapters 
XII and XIII. 

It is in the light of all these facts that a new na- 
tional poHcy is proposed. This policy deals with 
methods for the regulation of immigration and with 
standards for the naturaUzation of aliens. Free 
and frank discussion of these proposals is earnestly 
invited. 

The heavy work of securing from the many re- 
ports of the Bureau of Immigration the data needed 
for the statistical summaries given in Part II was 
done by Mr. Thomas P. Jones and Miss Frances E. 
Atwater. For this invaluable aid the author wishes 
to express his indebtedness. To his sister also, Mrs. 



xii INTRODUCTION 

F. F. Jewett, the author owes more than can easily 
be told for repeated careful reading of the manuscript 
in its various stages of development, and for numer- 
ous suggestions of the highest value. 

The inadequacy of the statistical section of this 
volume the writer keenly regrets. He is painfully 
aware of the perils of statistics — ^both those due to 
faulty handling and also those of positive error in 
computation, transcription, and proofreading. Who- 
ever reports errors detected will earn his gratitude. 

Sidney L. Gulick. 



PART I 
POLITICAL 



CHAPTER I 

THE NEW ASIA AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE 
FOR AMERICA 

Asia is no longer a sleeping giant whose wealth 
may be ruthlessly exploited and whose vital inter- 
ests may be haughtily ignored. The West and par- 
ticularly the United States should awake to the 
significance of the New Asia. West and East 
must find methods for mutually advantageous co- 
operation, good-will, and respect, or their rivalries, 
jealousies, and struggles will carry both down to 
destruction in frightful tragedies. 

Europe's catastrophe has suddenly shown how 
closely interwoven is the fabric of the modern 
world. The interlinking of the life and interests of 
the nations had advanced much further than was 
realized. Even Asia begins to figure as a mighty 
factor in Occidental affairs. Some regard this as 
ominous. We talk of the "yellow peril"; yet for 
decades, nay, for centuries, Asiatics feared and 
opposed an actual and progressively overmastering 
"white peril." 

For three hundred years geographical barriers 
have been rapidly vanishing, barriers that sepa- 



4 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

rated mankind into groups and furnished the condi- 
tions under which they grew into div^se races and 
civilizations. 

Now that oceans and mountains have vanished, 
mighty races find themselves face to face. The things 
that keep them apart to-day are languages, civiliza- 
tions, color, facial appearance, and especially prej- 
udices and group selfishness. The increasing con- 
tact of nations and races has been long in progress, 
but has now been suddenly revealed. It began 
afresh in modern times with the discovery and the 
conquest of America by the white peoples of Eu- 
rope. The coasts of Africa and the southern part 
of Asia gradually came under their control. 

But with the white man^s most recent discoveries 
in science, and the mastery of her secrets and titanic 
forces, his power has increased in the most extraor- 
dinary way. This has led to fresh incursions into 
unexplored regions in search of stores of unde- 
veloped wealth — wealth which he has seized with 
little regard for the interests or rights of native 
populations. 

Thus has the white man too often proved a "white 
peril " to the native populations of every land whither 
his curiosity or desire for wealth has taken him. 

The first effectual repulse of white men by men of 
another color has only recently come from Japan. 
Her reaction on the white man's approach deserves 
special attention, as through her all Asia is rapidly 



THE NEW ASIA 5 

taking on new forms of life and the white man has 
begun to talk about the "yellov/ peril." 

Japan's first contact with white men from Europe 
occurred in 1541. For sixty years and more Euro- 
peans had free opportunity in Japan. Under the 
instruction of Roman Catholic missionaries, several 
hundred thousand Japanese became Christians. 
Then Japan took fright at the white man's methods 
and ambitions. She closed her doors, expelled the 
missionaries and merchants, exterminated the Chris- 
tian religion, and, until 1853, lived a life of almost 
complete seclusion. No Japanese were allowed to 
leave her shores nor were foreigners allowed to 
enter her land. 

All this was done to escape the Occidental flood, 
which, during the intervening three hundred years, 
completely engulfed the peoples of North, Central, 
and South America, and large parts of Africa, Asia, 
and Australia. Even China was seriously humili- 
ated and injured. She was forced by the so-called 
opium wars (1845 and 1858) to give to the British 
not only privileges for ordinary trade, but for trade 
even in opium. Military and naval bases were 
also taken by Europeans. 

Japan soon discovered that she was unable longer 
to resist the encroachments of foreigners, and in 
1854 made her first treaties. After a dozen years 
of inner turmoil and a revolution, she frankly ac- 
cepted the new world-situation created by the 



6 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

white nationS; and undertook to learn their methods 
in order to meet them on a basis of equahty. 

This epoch-making decision was announced to 
the nation in an edict of five articles by the young 
Emperor, who as the first Emperor in a thousand 
yearS; unhampered by a dual form of government, 
held direct rule over the people. The edict (1868) 
virtually ordered the people to abandon ancient super- 
stition, to prepare for representative government, and 
to go out into all the world and learn whatever was good 
and true. 

In response to this edict a psychological as well as 
a social, industrial, and political revolution took 
place. All that Japan has been doing for fifty years 
has been but the practical carrying out in concrete 
ways of the new ideal and the new national policy 
that was then proclaimed. Recognizing that she 
could no longer carry out her historic policy of 
complete isolation and self-sufficiency, Japan de- 
liberately plunged into the life of the world in order 
to learn its best and to incoiporate it into her life 
in such ways as to stand upon a basis of equality 
with the other great nations of the world. 

In carrying out this new policy Japan reorganized 
the entire political, social, educational, economic, 
and industrial order of her ancient civilization. 
The sufferings entailed upon her people by the 
process few foreigners know. 

During the major part of this period of storm 



THE NEW ASIA 7 

and stress in which she was adopting and adapting 
Western customs, methods, and machinery, and 
striving to fit herself for her new place in the world, 
America's treatment of Japan was above reproach. 
Being in marked contrast to that of other lands, 
it called forth a gratitude toward, a friendship for, 
and a confidence in, America that Americans can- 
not easily realize. Witness our helpful diplomacy 
throughout the entire period, our return (1883) 
of the Shimonoseki indemnity ($875,000) with 
$30,000 interest (used by Japan in preparing for 
foreign commerce the harbor facilities of Yoko- 
hama), the religious, educational, and philanthropic 
work of American missionaries, and especially our 
welcome in America to her students, giving them 
every opportunity, not only in our schools, colleges, 
and Christian homes, but in our factories and in- 
dustries. 

The processes of reorganization and acquisition, 
however, are now largely over. The consequences 
are beginning to appear. The West is awakening 
to what has happened. It sees Japan's power, both 
actual and potential. Fear and suspicion are de- 
veloping. For Japan is now equipped with " civiliza- 
tion," with factories and shipyards, with bayonets, 
bullets, and battleships, and with Occidental ideas 
and with ideals as to the right of virile nations to 
expand, and to dominate over those that are weak 
or backward, taking possession of their natural 



8 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

wealth and exploiting their laboring classes. Two 
important and successful wars — with China and with 
Russia — and the annexation of Korea, have startled 
the world — both the East and the West. 

China, too, is now moving. Japan's successes 
and Europe's fresh aggressions have at last awakened 
that mighty people. In the nineties the "Powers" 
of Europe, having completed their '''division of 
Africa," began to look with greedy eyes on China. 
In 1896 Germany, Russia, and France compelled 
Japan to return Port Arthur to China in order to 
maintain, as they stated in their deceitful diplomacy, 
the integrity of China and the permanent peace of 
the Far East. But in 1897-1898 Germany took 
Kiao-Chao as indemnity for the killing of two Ger- 
man Jesuit missionaries. Russia received Port 
Arthur as a reward for having kept Japan out of the 
same. England took Wei-hai-wei and France took 
Kwan-chau-wan to keep up "the balance." In 
each case the impotent Manchu government made 
treaties with those "friendly Powers," giving them 
concessions and "rights." But the people of China 
grew anxious. /There soon developed (1900) the 
"Boxer uprising." China's common people of the 
north sought to turn the white man out and keep 
"China for the Chinese." 

But it was too late. Six "civilized" armies 
marched up to Peking, and, to teach China a lesson 
regarding the sacredness of treaties and the white 



THE NEW ASIA 9 

man's "rights," in addition to the outrages and de- 
struction wrought by the soldiers, they saddled 
upon China an indemnity exceeding $300,000,000, 
far exceeding the actual costs. Poor China ! 

Then, according to mutual agreement, all the allies 
withdrew their troops to their home lands, except 
Russia. Ignoring her promise, she not only left 
her troops in Manchuria, but began to send in thou- 
sands more. Japan became anxious. Negotiations 
were started. Russia procrastinated, meanwhile 
increasing her east Siberian forces, completing her 
Siberian railroad, and gaining diplomatic and other 
footholds in Korea. This exasperating, insolent, 
and ominous policy caused the Russo-Japanese 
War. 

Japan felt that the complete possession by Russia 
of Manchuria, Mongolia, and Korea threatened her 
very existence as an independent nation. The 
"partition of China" also by the European nations 
would surely follow. But Japan's acquisition of 
Occidental "civilization" had been so far successful 
that single-handed, though indirectly supported by 
her alliance with Great Britain, she beat back the 
"bear from the north" and saved, not only herself, 
but China also from the threatened European in- 
vasion that had swept over all of south Asia from 
Mesopotamia to Cochin-China, and of north Asia 
from European Russia to Alaska. 

One month after the signing of the treaty of peace 



10 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

between Russia and Japan at Portsmouth, N. H., 
China's conservative leaders at last saw the light 
and definitely abandoned her ancient and proud 
policy of self-sufficiency. From that wondrous 
victory of Japan over Russia, China learned that 
knowledge from the West such as Japan had been 
acquiring for forty years could alone enable Asiatics 
to meet white aggressors successfully.] The ultra- 
conservative Empress Dowager, who had been 
cutting off the heads of reformers both literally and 
metaphorically, became herself a great reformer. 
She abolished China's ancient system of classical 
education and ordered the introduction throughout 
the empire of Occidental education. This was in 
1906. 

The changes that have followed in the intervening 
years have been beyond belief to those who thought 
they knew China. Millions of Chinese are studying 
Western ways. Nearly 1,400 Chinese students are 
now in American institutions of learning. Tens of 
thousands of Chinese young men have studied in 
Japan since the war with Russia, seeking short cuts 
to Western knowledge. In 1910 and 1911 some 
15,000 Chinese students were studying in the single 
city of Tokyo, Japan. Not for centuries has China's 
outlook been so bright. In 1912 the ahen Manchu 
dynasty was driven from the throne. Repeated 
efforts for the re-establishment of monarchy have 
failed. The nation is pushing forward with remark- 



THE NEW ASIA 11 

able insistence for modern forms of government 
and for alignment with the life of the West. The 
opium trade has been stopped and its curse has 
been substantially overcome. Political graft is be- 
ing eliminated. Occidental education is proceeding, 
and desire for reforms is wide-spread. If China can 
avoid further alien intrusion, her future is decidedly- 
hopeful. 

A New China is now clearly above the inter- 
national horizon. Her young men are training for 
intelligent leadership of that mighty people. In two 
or three decades they will be guiding China's policies. 
Will they be friendly or hostile to us ? 

The Orient is acquiring a new life — a new vitality. 
The motive power that will more and more direct 
its policies is twofold. The first factor is practical. 
It will come from the pressure of an increasing popu- 
lation — ^pressure that will grow mightily with every 
new decade. For Occidental hygiene, medical 
science, and ideals as to the value of the individual 
will rapidly multiply China's millions. Japan's 
population has doubled in fifty years. Will China's 
population do the same? "Where wiU they live? 
Whence will they secure their food ? 

The second factor is psychological. Orientals 
are not lacking in pride, in courage, in determination, 
and in ideals. An armed Orient will resent dis- 
courtesy, humiliation, and unfair dealing. It will 
fight for honor — for equal treatment. If the West 



12 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

claims superiority and right based on might, the 
East when ready will challenge its claim and test its 
might. 

The adoption by Japan and China of the mechan- 
ical, economic, social, and political elements of Occi- 
dental civilization constitutes indeed the beginning 
of a new era in human history. We are not at the 
end but at the beginning of the mighty movements 
in Asia that are transforming them. The impact 
of the West on the East is now beginning to bring re- 
sults that were not anticipated. Asia has been com- 
pelled by the pressure of the West to realize that she 
could not carry on her life regardless of the West. 
The West is beginning to discover that she cannot 
carry on her life regardless of the East. 

More and more the essential unity and community 
of mankind is coming to light. No fragment, no 
nation can continue longer to live as if it were the 
whole. Each part must accept its place as a part 
of the whole and live for the welfare of the whole. 
Failure to do this will bring disaster after disaster, 
if not complete destruction. 

A New Asia means a new world. Each haK, East 
and West, White and Yellow, must in some way 
overcome its inherited tendencies to arrogance and 
pride, selfishness and greed. We are members one 
of another. We must adjust our national policies, 
our political and economic relations, and our mental 
attitudes in order both to express and to realize the 



THE NEW ASIA 13 

new life upon which the entire human brotherhood 
is inevitably and irrevocably entering. 

To appreciate these matters the better we shall 
study in the following chapters the problems and the 
claims of Japan and China; the history of our legisla- 
tion dealing with immigration and naturalization, 
the relation of citizenship to democracy, and the 
rights and duties of nations. 

We shall then present in outline the needed policy 
and programme for dealing with the entire problem. 



CHAPTER II 

JAPAN: HER PROBLEMS AND CLAIMS 

Japan's entrance into the life of the world and 
acceptance of the civilization of the West has not 
been to her an unmixed blessing. In important 
respects her problems have become more intense. 
Her modern system of miiversal education giving 
world outlook; ideals, and ambitions to millions of 
her young men and women; her extraordinary in- 
dustrial development and international trade bring- 
ing wealth and a higher scale of life to millions, but 
also bringing grinding toil, poverty, disease, and 
wretchedness to other millions; her new political 
system giving responsibility for national as well as 
for local government and causing the entire nation 
to consider and decide upon international relations 
and policies; her new ideals as to the value and 
rights of the individual begetting throughout the 
nation a spirit of insistence on rights and a forget- 
ting of the importance of service and the neces- 
sity of duty; her modern hygiene and her medical 
and surgical efficiency giving remarkable success in 
battling with epidemics no less than with the regular 
diseases, and making possible a lower death-rate and 
a longer average of life — these many blessings have 
brought also many new problems. 

14 



JAPAN 15 

The full discussion of these problems, however, is 
no part of our plan. We need to consider them 
only so far as they throw light on the character of the 
policy which America should adopt in her dealings 
with Japan. 

Japan's old policy kept her people at home, al- 
most stationary in numbers and relatively docile and 
contented. Her new policy opens their eyes to the 
great world, gives them efficiency in dealing with it, 
multiplies her millions and fires them with ambi- 
tion both personal and national. Mighty economic 
and psychological forces are at work sweeping the 
entire nation along in its course and making certain 
for Japan an important role in international affairs. 

A few concrete facts may help Americans to under- 
stand the situation better, and to sympathize more 
truly with the people as they face their modern 
problems. 

Japan proper has an area of 147,000 square miles 
(California has 158,000), of which one-sixth, or about 
15,000,000 acres, is under cultivation. Many States 
have more cultivated land than has Japan (Kansas 
has 30,000,000; Nebraska, 24,000,000; Indiana, 
17,000,000; New York, 14,000,000; Ohio, 19,000,- 
000). The average farm in Japan is two and a half 
acres, a half-acre to each individual on the farm, and 
a quarter-acre to each inhabitant of the nation. 

Tenants pay for farm rentals 57 per cent of their 
rice, and 44 per cent of other crops. Taxes consume 



16 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

16 per cent of the total yield of the farms. Farmer 
debts amount to $475;000;000; paymg interest rates 
from 7 per cent to 20 per cent. The total private 
income of Japanese is taxed at from 20 to 30 per cent. 

The population of Japan proper is nearly 55,- 
000,000, growing yearly by about 700,000. (Great 
Britain has 46,000,000; Canada, 8,000,000; Aus- 
tralia, 6,000,000; and New Zealand, 1,100,000; total, 
about 60,000,000.) 

With the exception of copper, Japan is poor in 
mineral resources. While the coal production of 
the United States was 458,000,000 tons in 1916, that 
of Japan was 22,000,000 tons, only enough to supply 
the United States Steel Corporation for eight months. 
Japan has no iron to speak of, and no cotton. She 
sells large quantities of her high-grade rice to foreign 
lands and imports low-grade rice for herself from 
China. 

"It has often been pointed out that the population 
of Japan is not so dense as in Belgium or England. 
But Belgium and England are almost wholly arable; 
Japan is almost wholly mountainous. If we elimi- 
nate from the figures of area the unproductive lands 
of each country, the population per square mile works 
out approximately: England, 466; Belgium, 702; 
Japan, 2,688. A population of 2,688 on every square 
mile of arable land — ^less than a quarter of an acre 
of land for each person ! There is more good land 
in mountainous Kentucky than in all Japan." * 

* "Japan and Anaerica," by Carl Crow, p. 11. 



JAPAN 17 

Japan's problem is how adequately to feed, clothe, 
house, and educate her multiplying millions and give 
them that larger, richer life of the modern world for 
which their intelligence, industry, education, ambi- 
tions, and world outlook are fitting them. 

Were Americans under the physical and economic 
conditions of the Japanese sketched above, would 
they not regard their load and their problems as 
staggering? And would they not feel compelled 
to avail themselves of every possible opportunity 
for trade, emigration, and legitimate territorial 
expansion? And with their history and intrinsic 
ability, would they not earnestly ask of the nations 
of the world a square deal, equal treatment, and 
honorable recognition ? 

If America were in Japan's place as to population, 
food-supplies, and natural resources, what would she 
do? 

The mutual impact of the expanding life of both 
Japan and the United States comes at three points, 
and requires some kind of adjustment of policies, 
if these two powerful, ambitious, and able nations 
are to live together as good neighbors. 

These three points of impact as they have emerged 
historically, relate to matters of Japanese immigra- 
tion into the United States, to the treatment of 
Japanese in the United States, and to the respective 
policies of the two nations in China. With reference 
to the third point we present no discussion in this 



18 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

volume, as it has already been discussed rather 
carefully in "America and the Orient/',^ and is not 
immediately connected with the purpose of the 
present volume. 

Nor shall we discuss the general features of Japa- 
nese immigration to Calif ornia, the conditions there, 
the wrongs they have done and also suffered, and 
the improvement in the general situation that is 
now beginning to take place. These more general 
aspects of Japanese immigration have been con- 
sidered at some length in the earlier chapters of 
"The American Japanese Problem."^ 

In this chapter I wish to emphasize the difference 
between the view-points of the Japanese and Ameri- 
can Governments, and also of their respective peo- 
ples in regard to the "gentlemen's agreement." In 
general it may be said that both governments are 
well satisfied with its nature and its results while 
the peoples are not satisfied. 

The government of the United States sees that 
without any legislation on our part, Japan by her 
own restrictive policy in regard to the issuing of pass- 
ports, beginning in 1908, has practically stopped the 
coming of new Japanese labor immigration to the 
United States. The administration of the Chinese 

^ "America and the Orient," Sidney L. Gulick (Missionary Educa- 
tion Movement, New York, 1916). 

2 "The American Japanese Problem," Sidney L. GuHck (Charles 
Scribner's Sons, New York, 1914). 



JAPAN 19 

exclusion laws, on the contrary, has caused us an 
enormous amount of trouble and expense, and has 
necessitated repeated legislation; and even so our 
laws have been continuously evaded by considerable 
numbers of insistent Chinese immigrants. Japan's 
administration of the gentlemen's agreement is more 
satisfactory to us and also more successful than our 
administration of our own Chinese exclusion laws. 

The Japanese Government is also well satisfied 
v/ith the "agreement" because it thereby has pre- 
vented the enactment by the United States of 
Japanese exclusion laws, which would be exceedingly 
humiliating, as they would subject Japanese to the 
same invidious and discriminatory treatment that 
has been inflicted on the Chinese. 

The people, however, in both countries who know 
of the " agreement ' ' are by no means satisfied. Some 
Americans insist that the restriction of Japanese im- 
migration should not be a matter of Japanese cour- 
tesy merely. We should have our own laws regulat- 
ing the matter. Should Japan decide to suspend the 
"agreement" and suddenly send over to us tens of 
thousands of immigrants we would be at her mercy, 
for we have no laws that would authorize their re- 
jection or deportation. Americans who urge this 
view, however, are probably not many. Most 
Americans have implicit trust in the word of Japan. 
We believe most confidently that she will continue 
faithfully to administer the "agreement." 



20 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

The people of Japan, on the other hand, milHons 
of them, keenly resent the action of their govern- 
ment in giving us that pledge and in administering 
it so strictly. Few Americans realize what it means 
to tens of thousands of ambitious young men and 
women. They know that in America are millions 
of uncultivated acres and vast undeveloped re- 
sources. They are eager to go to a land flowing with 
milk and honey, where gold is cheap and wages high. 
They are able and willing to work. They cannot 
understand why their government should enter 
upon and rigidly enforce a policy so humiliating and 
unfair. 

Does not America open her doors to immigrants 
from every country of Europe? they ask. Are 
Japanese indeed so inferior to the immigrants of 
those countries that they are not worthy of equal 
opportimity in that land of plenty and opportunity 
for all? America's rejection of Chinese immigra- 
tion is indeed intelligible, for Chinese are in truth 
an inferior race. But, they continue, we Japanese 
are in no respects inferior to Italians and Slavs, 
Turks and Armenians, Africans and Mexicans. We 
are peaceable and industrious and efficient. We ask 
no special favors. We are willing to take only what 
we earn. Why then does America deny us oppor- 
tunity ? And why does our government weakly and 
shamefully yield to such a dog-in-the-manger policy 
and so insulting to our race ? Is America dominated 



JAPAN 21 

by race selfishness, and her pohcy controlled by race 
pride and prejudice? 

Can friendship be one-sided ? How can America 
profess to be friendly with Japan whose immigrants 
in small numbers she refuses at the very time that 
she is admitting hundreds of thousands from peoples 
in no way superior ? And if America is not friendly 
to Japan, can Japan be friendly to America? How 
can Japan tamely submit to a treatment and a re- 
lation that is virtually an insult, an unbearable 
himiiliation ? 

The experience is biting deep into their national 
soul. In the Hght of such experience and reflections 
Japanese admiration of, and friendship for, America 
have been seriously shaken during the past decade. 

Their responsible leaders, however, recognize that 
they are at present caught between the devil and 
the deep sea. Their faithful administration of the 
"gentlemen's agreement," they see, alone prevents 
America from passing Japanese exclusion laws simi- 
lar to those excluding the Chinese. The humilia- 
tion of that situation would be manifold more bit- 
ter than the present humiliation. The government 
and the leading Japanese see no way out of the 
present predicament. With smiling face and the 
best of grace they accordingly give assurances that 
they will continue the "gentlemen's agreement" 
in full force in the interest of the "historic friend- 
ship " of the two peoples. 



22 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

The third element in the impact of the policies of 
America and Japan is the treatment of Japanese 
already in the United States. 

An anti-Japanese movement has been developing 
in the United States leading to differential race legis- 
lation. It has taken acutest form in the California 
Anti-Alien Land Law. Without attempting to char- 
acterize this movement adequately I may yet de- 
scribe it as a movement partly economic, implic- 
itly confessing fear of Japanese superior efficiency; 
partly racial, expressing scorn, disdain, and arrogance 
at the ambition and success of a people "instinc- 
tively" felt to be essentially inferior; partly political, 
furnishing opportunity for certain individuals and 
political groups to gain personal or party advantage 
by appealing to selfish interest and race prejudice 
against sections of the community politically help- 
less; and partly natural and inevitable, arising from 
numberless mistakes, misunderstandings, and mis- 
deeds of individuals of different race groups speak- 
ing different languages and acting under different 
customs, ideas, and ideals. 

Many Americans have made up their minds that 
they do not like the Japanese; that the less we have 
to do with them the better, that we should not allow 
more of them to come to our shores, and that the 
sooner and the more completely we can secure the 
departure of those already here, the better. They 
grasp at any story abusing the Japanese or putting 



JAPAN 23 

them in a bad light. They readily believe every- 
thing bad said about them, and pass on the story 
with zest. They favor any form of legislation 
calculated to hamper their economic opportunity 
without regard to the implications and the interna- 
tional consequences. 

Because of these feeHngs, cultivated by a certain 
section of the press and now widely entertained, 
Japanese in America often suffer personal insult and 
humiliation. In some sections of our land they are 
excluded from barber-shops; in others from restau- 
rants. Some Young Men's Christian Associations 
will not receive them into full membership. Jap- 
anese travellers tell of many a slight and humiliating 
insult experienced in this land of liberty. The 
United States is the one civilized country to which 
they go where they are subjected to such irritating 
and humiliating experiences. 

Of course most Japanese well recognize that on 
the other hand they customarily receive splendid 
treatment in the United States. Schools and col- 
leges are open to them. Individual Japanese have 
made good and have been received in many walks 
of life, as business men, as professors in colleges, as 
physicians and surgeons, as experts in chemistry, 
biology, and various sciences, as tennis-players, and 
as public speakers of distinction. In social rela- 
tions they are widely accepted in most sections of 
the United States. 



24 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

In spite, however, of these achievements and more 
favorable relations, Japanese realize that their sta- 
tus in the United States is more or less precarious, 
liable to sudden reversal and humiliation. A dis- 
tinct Japanese policy has accordingly been gradually 
forming in regard to this matter. It is a policy of 
insistence on equality of treatment and of pohtical 
opportunity. They refuse to accept the status of 
race inferiority and resent any expressions of word 
or conduct, and especially of laws, that carry that 
implication. This is not only the policy of Japanese 
individuals but of the nation and of the government. 
They are prepared to insist in every legitimate way 
that in a land where liberty, equality, and fraternity 
are so emphasized, in a land that proclaims itself 
and prides itself on being "Christian," they shall 
enjoy the same privileges that are freely granted to 
men of various other nations and races. They will 
not tamely submit to any disqualifying treatment 
or discriminatory legislation directed against them 
merely because they are Japanese. Their sensitive, 
high-strung natures resent the indignity, both per- 
sonal and racial. 

The very purpose of the "gentlemen's agreement" 
so far as Japan was concerned was to make needless 
any anti-Japanese legislation in America. Cali- 
fornia's Anti-Alien Land Law therefore cut deep into 
the heart of Japan — not because of its economic 
aspects, but because of its humiliating implication, 



JAPAN 25 

which, moreover, was false — that Japan was not 
faithfully administering the "agreement," and that 
Japanese deserved to be treated differentially be- 
cause of their race. The clever phraseology of that 
law by which it sought to keep within the Consti- 
tution and the treaty, made the fundamental issue 
perfectly clear. So long as Japanese are regarded 
as "ineligible for naturalization" their status in the 
United States is precarious, and local differential 
treatment and legislation is inevitable. The fun- 
damentally obnoxious anti- Japanese legislation of 
the United States, therefore, is not that of Cali- 
fornia or other Western States, but that of Congress 
itseff, defining "eligibility for citizenship." 

The question of Japanese immigration, and the 
question of their acquisition of the privileges of 
American citizenship, constitute thus the two foci 
of the American-Japanese problem concerning which 
national poHcies are more or less in conflict. If 
harmony and genuine good-will are to be maintained 
between these two countries, answers for both 
these questions must be found that will satisfy the 
sense of justice, of right, and of fair dealing of both 
nations. 

If the rigid restriction of immigration from Japan 
and the exclusion of otherwise qualified Japanese 
from the privileges of American citizenship entirely 
on the ground of their race are really right and 
necessary, these positions and the laws embodjdng 



26 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

them must be based on gromids and carried out by 
methods that imply neither race arrogance nor eco- 
nomic race selfishness. Japan will then be satisfied. 
If these policies and laws are not or cannot be thus 
grounded and administered they must be given up. 
Americans must be led to this position by considera- 
tions of fair play, the square deal, and enlightened 
self-interest. 

Japan and America are neighbors and will always 
remain so. They must follow the principles of 
neighborliuess, each having a care for the welfare 
and good-will of the other. This may at times re- 
quire self-sacrifice and surrender of "rights." But 
these are the conditions of all human life that is 
noble and worth while. Nations no less than in- 
dividuals win greatness by service and are called on 
to forego selfish advantage at the expense of neigh- 
bors. No nation liveth to itself. Nations as well 
as individuals are members one of another. Any 
selfish or arrogant action or attitude that America 
may take that is humiliating or harmful to Japan 
cannot fail to have its harmful reaction on America. 
The permanent peace of the Pacific can be main- 
tained only by neighbors that are mutually cour- 
teous, considerate, and willing to co-operate for each 
other's welfare. 

In order that we may more adequately under- 
stand the concrete facts of the situation we should 
also study the statistics of Japanese immigration 



JAPAN " 27 

and emigration, and the extent, distribution, and 
character of the Japanese population that has 
entered upon permanent residence in this country. 
These facts are presented in Chapters XI, XII, and 
XIII, 

Appendix to Chapter II 

"If one race assumes the right to appropriate 
all the wealth, why should not all the other races 
feel ill used and protest? If the yellow races are 
oppressed by the white races, and have to revolt to 
avoid congestion and maintain existence, whose 
fault is it but that of the aggressors? ... If the 
white races truly love peace, and wibh to deserve the 
name of Christian nations, they will practice what 
they preach and will soon restore to us the rights so 
long withheld. . . . Any suggestion that we must 
he forever content to remain inferior races will not 
abide. Such an attitude is absolutely inconsistent with 
our honor as a nation and our sovereign rights as inde- 
pendent states. We therefore appeal to the white races 
to put aside their race prejudice and meet us on equal 
terms in brotherly co-operation.''^ — Professor R. Nagai, 
Japan Magazine, May, 1914. 

"The fundamental question in the California 
land trouble is that of discrimination. It is a matter 
of honor. If for the purpose of self-protection the 
United States determine that no alien should hold 
land, that would be all well and good. The United 
States would have a perfect right to do so, and every- 
one would respect that right. But when we alone 
are discriminated against, we feel that we must 
protest." — Doctor Juichi Soyeda, in a pamphlet on 
the California Japanese Question, 1913. 



28 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

Mr. Tokutomi in an article in the Kokumin Shim- 
hun, of December 26, 1914, said that "the 'agree- 
ment' has made it almost as difficult to get to America 
as it is to get to heaven J' 

"If we let the California anti-Japanese movement 
stand where it is now, it simply means increasing 
injury to the dignity of our country. ... If our 
government could not see the anti-alien land law 
nullified and naturalization rights affirmed by the 
American people, if there were any signs of weak- 
ness in diplomatic negotiations with the United 
States, China might begin to mock us and the Koreans 
might become disobedient to the Japanese administra- 
tion J ^ — Professor M. Kobe, New York-Japan Review, 
September, 1913, p. 163. 

"We are a peace-loving nation. Our endurance 
has stood the successive tests of the Manchurian 
railway question, the school affair, the immigration 
flurry, the California land-law dispute ; it will stand 
more because we are bent on the maintenance of 
peace. But with a view to a speedy and amicable 
settlement of the outstanding complication, we 
claim that America accede to one of the two alterna- 
tives — ^the granting of the right of naturalization to 
the Japanese, or the conclusion of a treaty to guaran- 
tee their rights of owning land or of leasing farms. 
I venture to say this is no extravagant claim. Jus- 
tice demands that America shall treat the Japanese 
on equal terms with European immigrants, since she 
has permitted the former to enter and live on her 
land. If it is a question of granting such rights to 
millions of Japanese, it may be too serious for 
America to consent; but it is a matter that involves 



JAPAN 29 

only 90,000 residents. Is she still reluctant to com- 
ply with our claim? If she rejects it, I am afraid 
that the day will come when our friendship toward 
her shall cease." — Professor S. Suyehiro, "Japan's 
Message to America," p. 69. 



CHAPTER III 
CHINA: OUR TREATIES AND OUR TREATMENT 

The decision of China to enter completely into 
the life of the world, and to adopt the character- 
istic mechanical, economic, social, and political 
elements of Occidental civilization is a decision of 
the utmost importance to the entire world, and 
especially to America. It is vital, therefore, that 
the United States should carefully consider the 
new situation. What have been its relations with 
China in the past? Have they been honorable 
and helpful? What is the duty of America at this 
time in its relations with China and its treatment 
of the Chinese in America. What responsibilities 
have we, if any, for helping China? And, what is 
even more pertinent, what should we do to correct 
the errors and wrongs of our past relations and to 
put and keep ourselves right in our future dealings 
with that mighty new force in world development 
and world politics ? 

In order to answer these questions we must first 

review the history of our past relations with China 

and our treatment of Chinese in this country. 

The story of our dealings with China is, as a whole, 

30 



CHINA 31 

one of which we need not be ashamed. We have 
not seized her territory, bombarded her ports, or 
pillaged her capitals as other nations have. On 
the contrary, we have helped preserve her from 
"partition" at a grave crisis in her relations with 
Western lands. We have stood for the open door 
and a square deal. Our consular courts have been 
models of probity and justice. The work of our 
missionaries in hospitals, in education, and in fam- 
ine and flood relief has been highly appreciated. In 
compensation for American lives and property de- 
stroyed by Chinese mobs we have not made exces- 
sive demands for indemnities, except in the case of 
the Boxer uprising. At that time we seized in 
Peking and still hold the "compound" on which 
our legation buildings stand, and we demanded 
and received $24,000,000 to be paid in instalments 
with interest. Since 1907, however, we have been 
returning the excess portion and by 1939 we shall 
have returned to China about $40,000,000. 

In consequence of such factors the Chinese as a 
nation hold to-day a highly gratifying attitude of 
friendship toward us. So conspicuous has this 
friendship and preferential treatment become since 
the establishment of the republic that other nations 
have begun to note it. In the reforms taking place 
in China, especially in her educational system, in 
her political and social reorganization, and in her 
moral and religious awakening, the influence of 



32 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

Americans is far beyond that exercised by any other 
people. 

When we turn, however, to the story of what 
many Chinese have suffered here, we are filled with 
shame. The story would be incredible were it not 
overwhelmingly verified by ample documentary 
evidence. Treaties have pledged rights, immunities, 
and protection. They have, nevertheless, been dis- 
regarded and even knowingly invaded; and this not 
only by private individuals, but by legislators and 
administrative officials. Scores of Chinese have 
been murdered, hundreds wounded, and thousands 
robbed by anti-Asiatic mobs, with no protection for 
the victims or punishment for the culprits. State 
legislatures, and even Congress, have enacted laws 
in contravention of treaty provisions. Men ap- 
pointed to federal executive offices have at times 
administered those laws and regulations with offen- 
sive methods. 

Few Americans know what has taken place. The 
above general statements sound vague and incon- 
clusive. Let us therefore consider definite details. 

Previous to the coming of considerable Chinese 
immigration to this country the relations of China 
and the United States were well-nigh ideal. Our 
merchants were welcomed m China and did an hon- 
orable and extensive trade to the advantage of both 
countries. So cordial had the relations become that 
when our minister, Anson Burlingame, negotiated 



CHINA 33 

the new treaty of July 28, 1868, an article was in- 
serted providing for free immigration. It reads as 
follows: 

"Article V. — The United States of America and 
the Emperor of China cordially recognize the in- 
herent and inalienable right of man to change his 
home and allegiance, and also the mutual advantage 
of the free migration and immigration of their 
citizens and subjects respectively from the one 
country to the other for purposes of curiosity, of 
trade, or as permanent residents. The high con- 
tracting parties therefore join in reprobating any 
other than an entirely voluntary immigration for 
these purposes." 

Special articles of the treaty also provided for "most 
favored nation" privileges of travel, of education, 
and of teaching. 

Chinese immigration to the United States may be 
said to have begun in 1851 with the arrival that 
year in San Francisco of 2,716 persons. By 1882, 
when free immigration from China was forbidden 
by act of Congress, some 300,000 Chinese had come 
to the United States; during that same interval 
about 150,000 are recorded as having returned. 
Careful estimates indicated that in 1882 there were 
about 132,300 Chinese on the Pacific coast. 

Anti-Chinese agitation and discriminatory legis- 
lation began very soon. Chinese were regarded 
by many as on a par with Indians and Negroes. 
"The (California) State superintendent of pubHc in- 



34 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

stmction^ in 1859, protested against the attempt 
to force 'Africans, Chinese, and Niggers' into 
white schools."^ The California Statute of 1860 ex- 
cluded Mongolians, Indians, and Negroes from the 
public schools. 

"The result of the exclusion of their testimony 
from the courts was most disastrous for the Chi- 
nese. It made it possible for imprincipled whites to 
commit crimes against them with impunity so long 
as there were no white witnesses. Much of the 
discrimination suffered by the Chinese was due to 
the fact that the administration of the law was in 
the hands of officials whose political future depended 
on their pleasing the miners who constituted, at that 
time, the chief body of workingmen in the State." ^ 

With the advent of the "sand-lot orators" in the 
seventies the anti-Chinese agitation grew apace. 
In 1876 the California State Legislature, with an 
eye to the national election of that year, appointed 
a committee of investigation whose report of 300 
pages became the basis of the nation-wide anti- 
Chinese campaign. Ten thousand copies were 
distributed to governors, editors, and legislators 
throughout the United States. 

Theodore Hittel speaks of that report in the 
following terms : 

"As was expected and in fact perfectly under- 
stood beforehand, the report was violently anti- 

1 "Chinese Immigration," by M. R. Coolidge, 1909, p. 78. 

2 Ibid., p. 81. 



CHINA 35 

Chinese in character and suited the popular prej- 
udice so well that 20,000 copies were ordered printed. 
Matters had so far advanced that nobody, par- 
ticularly nobody that held or ever expected to hold 
office, dared say a word in favor of the Chinese; but 
on the contrary, everybody, the Republicans as well 
as the Democrats, seized every opportunity to make 
public profession on the anti-Chinese side." ^ 

"In order to produce an anti-Chinese report the 
committee ignored, emasculated, or falsified most of 
the competent testimony, preferring in matters of 
religion the opinion of police officers to those of 
missionaries; on the subject of manufacture, the 
opinions of police officers to those of a large manu- 
facturer; and again on the subject of coolie slavery 
the opinions of city officials and policemen to those 
of persons who had lived for many years in China." ^ 

So violent was the anti-Chinese sentiment that 
when F. M. Pixley, of San Francisco, presented the 
case before the Congressional Committee of 1876, 
he used these words: 

"The Chinese are inferior to any race God ever 
made. . . . Their people have got the perfection 
of crimes of 4,000 years. ... I believe the Chinese 
have no souls to save, and if they have they are not 
worth saving." ^ 

The federal courts, however, would not recog- 
nize the anti-Chinese legislation of the Pacific coast 
States, which was regarded as unconstitutional and 
in violation of treaty. A movement, therefore, 

^ Ibid., p. 83. ^ Professor Coolidge, ibid., p. 95. 

» lUd., p. 96. 



36 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

started for the negotiation of a new treaty and the 
enactment of anti-Chinese federal legislation. 

In 1876 Congress established a special committee 
which took evidence of 129 witnesses in San Fran- 
cisco and Sacramento. Their report, however, "re- 
veals the intentional perversion of the testimony in 
order to produce the desired anti-Chinese campaign 
document."^ 

The full story of the malicious and deceitful 
character of that long-continued campaign should 
be read and known by all true Americans who de- 
sire now to correct the errors of the past and set 
right our relation with China. 

The agitation so far succeeded that in 1880 a 
supplemental treaty with China was negotiated, 
permitting the United States to suspend the immi- 
gration of Chinese laborers. The important sec- 
tions of that new treaty are: 

Article I provides that "the Government of the 
United States may regulate, limit or suspend such 
coming or residence of Chinese (laborers), but may 
not absolutely prohibit it. The limitation or sus- 
pension shall be reasonable and shall apply only 
to . . . laborers." 

Article II provides that: "Chinese laborers who 
are now in the United States shall be allowed to go 
and come of their own free will and accord, and 
shall be accorded all the rights, privileges, immuni- 

1 Ibid., p. 104. 



CHINA 37 

ties, and exemptions which are accorded to citizens 
and subjects of the most favored nation." 

Article III provides that in case of ill treatment 
the "Government of the United States will exert 
all its power to devise measures for their protection 
and to secure to them the same rights, privileges, 
immunities, and exemptions as may be enjoyed by 
citizens or subjects of the most favored nation, and 
to which they are entitled by treaty." 

Article IV provides that legislative measures deal- 
ing with Chinese shall be "communicated to the 
Government of China," and if found "to work 
hardship upon the subjects of China, consultations 
shall be held to the end that mutual and unqualified 
benefit may result." 

In spite, however, of the complete cessation of 
Chinese labor immigration, and in spite of the 
promises of our government to provide protection, 
"and most favored nation treatment," the unjust 
treatment of Chinese did not cease. The outrages 
committed on the Chinese during the eighties were 
even more inexcusable than those of the preceding 
decade. 

In his discussion of the question whether the 
federal government should protect aliens in their 
treaty rights, Ex-President William H. Taft cites 
the cases of 50 Chinamen who suffered death at 
the hand-s of American mobs in our Western States, 
and of 120 others, many of whom were wounded 



38 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

and robbed of all their property. The list does not 
profess to be complete. All these outrages have 
occurred since 1885. 

"In an official note of February 15, 1886, riots 
were reported at Bloomfield, Redding, Boulder 
Creek, Eureka, and other towns in California, in- 
volving murder, arson, and robbery, and it was 
added that thousands of Chinese had been driven 
from their homes." 

None of the criminals were punished in spite of 
the article in the treaty which expressly provides 
that in case "Chinese laborers meet iU treatment 
at the hands of other persons, the Government of 
the United States will exert all its power to devise 
measures for their protection and secure to them 
the same rights, privileges, immunities, and exemp- 
tions as may be enjoyed by citizens or subjects of 
the most favored nation and to which they are en- 
titled by treaty." Congress, it is true, has voted 
indemnities for families of those murdered, but 
financial remuneration can hardly be supposed to 
take the place of justice or to be a substitute for ob- 
servance of treaty pledges. 

It is sometimes said that Italians and other aliens 
suffered similarly from mob violence and they too 
were not protected, nor were the criminals punished, 
and that therefore China cannot complain of excep- 
tional treatment. But is it not obvious that failure 



CHINA 39 

of the United States to fulfil its treaty pledges to 
Italy and other countries in no wise justifies similar 
failure toward China ? Does it not rather show that 
the United States is culpable for failure to make 
adequate provision for the faithful performance of 
its treaty pledges? This moral and legal defect 
has become most conspicuous in our relations with 
China, but its culpability is in no wise lessened — 
rather it is aggravated — as soon as it becomes clear 
that the defect is entirely due to the failure of Con- 
gress to take the needed action. For provision for 
such action is made by the Constitution of the 
United States. 

The failure of Congress seems inexcusable, for it 
found time to enact not only the first general exclu- 
sion law in harmony with the treaty with China, 
but also several supplementary laws, of which im- 
portant clauses are admittedly in contravention to 
the treaty. 

The Scott law of 1888 and the Geary law of 1892 
are still in force, though the essential injustice of 
some of their provisions and their disregard of 
Chinese treaty rights are now recognized. They 
are producing constant anti-American feeling among 
Chinese legitimately in America. Even in cosmo- 
politan New York and in Boston, Chinese some- 
times suffer from the acts of federal officers who 
supervise Chinese residents in the United States, 
acts, moreover, which are required by the laws 



40 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

and administrative regulations dealing with the Chi- 
nese. 

With regard to the Scott law. Senator Sherman 
said that it was " one of the most vicious laws that 
have passed in my time in Congress." It was 
passed as a "mere political race between the two 
houses ... in the face of a Presidential election." 
Senator Dawes sarcastically referred to keeping the 
treaties as long as we had a mind to. The law was 
"a rank unblushing repudiation of every treaty obli- 
gation . . . unwarranted by any existing danger — a 
violation such as the United States would not dare 
to commit toward any warlike nation of Europe."^ 

With regard to the Geary law, Professor Coolidge 
makes the following statement: 

"Meanwhile the Chinese minister at Washington, 
the consul-general at San Francisco, and the Yamen 
at Peking were also protesting against the act. The 
Chinese minister had steadily protested ever since 
the Scott Act against the plain violation of treaty; 
just preceding the Geary Act, he wrote six letters to 
Mr. Blaine only two of which were so much as 
acknowledged. He now declared that the Geary 
Act was worse than the Scott Act, for it not only 
violated every single article of the treaty of 1880, 
but also denied bail, required white witnesses, 
allowed arrest without warrant and put the burden 
of proof on the Chinese. He quoted our own state- 
ment on the harsh and hasty character of the Act, not 
required by any existing emergency, whose political 

1 Ibid., chap. XII. 



CHINA 41 

motive was well understood both in China and the 
United States. In his final protest he said: 'The 
statute of 1892 is a violation of every principle of 
justice, equity, reason, and fair-dealing between 
two friendly powers.'" ^ 

Not unnaturally, both the Chinese, and Ameri- 
cans interested in maintaining right relations with 
China, looked to the Supreme Court to declare un- 
constitutional such laws as contravene treaties — for 
are not treaties "the supreme law of the land"? 
The Chinese accordingly brought forward a test 
case dealing with certain provisions of the Scott Act 
(1888). 

Judge Field, who pronounced the judgment of 
the court, said : 

"It must be conceded that the Act of 1888 is in 
contravention of the treaty of 1868, and of the sup- 
plemental treaty of 1880, but it is not on that ac- 
count invalid. ... It (a treaty) can be deemed 
. . . only the equivalent of a legislative act, to be 
repealed or modified at the pleasure of Congress. 
... It is the last expression of sovereign will and 
must control." "The question whether our govern- 
ment was justified in disregarding its engagements 
with another nation is not one for the determination 
of the courts. . . . This court is not a censor of 
the morals of the other departments of the govern- 
ment." 

This made it clear that a treaty is not the "su- 
preme law of the land" except as Congress makes it 

1 Ibid., p. 221. 



42 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

so. Congress can, without violation of the Con- 
stitution, repeal or amend any part of a treaty even 
without securing the consent of the other party 
to the treaty, and even without conference. Trea- 
ties are declared by this decision to have no binding 
power upon Congress. The Supreme Court de- 
clined to take note of the moral obligations of treaty 
pledges. Disappointing though it may be, this is 
unquestionably correct law. Aliens deprived by 
Congress of rights promised by treaties may not 
appeal to the Supreme Court for the enforcement of 
those rights. The administration can indeed use 
the entire military force of the country to make a 
foreign nation observe its treaty obligations to us, 
but according to the interpretation of our Consti- 
tution, neither the administration nor the Supreme 
Court can hold Congress to the observance of our 
treaty pledges. The President has, of course, the 
power to veto an Act of Congress, but experience 
shows that even Presidents do not always regard 
treaties as binding, for the treaty-ignoring laws have 
been signed by the Presidents then in office. This 
makes it clear that the moral obligations of our 
nation must be carefully safeguarded by the peo- 
ple themselves. We must hold our representatives 
in Congress to their moral responsibilities in inter- 
national as in all other relations. This is a matter 
of moral energy — ^not of law. 
In 1904 Congress again contravened the treaty 



CHINA 43 

with China. The treaty (1880) states that "The 
United States may regulate, limit, or suspend such 
coming or residence (of Chinese labor immigration) 
but may not absolutely prohibit it. The limitation 
or suspension shall be reasonable.'' 

In harmony with these explicit provisions, Con- 
gress provided in 1882, in 1892, and again in 1902, 
for the temporary suspension of Chinese labor immi- 
gration for periods of ten years each. By 1894, how- 
ever, so many of the laws and department regula- 
tions dealing with the Chinese had become so mani- 
festly violations of the treaty that a new one was 
prepared in Washington to meet the difficulty, em- 
bodying the principal features of the anti-Chinese 
legislation. It proved, however, so obnoxious to 
the Chinese Government that at the first oppor- 
tunity, namely at the expiration (1904) of the ten- 
year period for which the treaty itself provided, 
China denounced the treaty. The relations of the 
two countries, therefore, fell back onto the treaty 
of 1880. In spite, however, of its provisions quoted 
above. Congress then enacted that "all laws regulat- 
ing, suspending or prohibiting the coming of Chinese 
persons — are hereby reenacted, extended, and con- 
tinued without modification, limitation, or condi- 
tion," thus again plainly contravening the treaty. 

The history of anti-Chinese legislation, as it has 
been carried through Congress under the pressure of 
legislators from the Pacific coast States, from the 



44' DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

eighth decade of the last century even down to the 
present, and the way in which the Asiatic problem 
has been made the "football of party politics" are 
ill omens for the future relations of America with the 
Orient. , Eight times in fourteen years anti-Chinese 
agitation on the Pacific coast secured increasingly 
drastic and obnoxious legislation in Congress. 
"All but one of these measures was passed on the 
eve of an election under political pressure for avowed 
political purposes." That legislation contravened 
plain provisions of the treaties, to say nothing of the 
spirit, and disregarded courteous protests of Chinese 
ministers and ambassadors. China sent in a " stream 
of dignified and ineffectual protests." The Chinese 
minister even charged us with duplicity in nego- 
tiating the treaty of 1880. "Mr. Bayard assured 
him that the President would veto any legislation 
which might be passed in violation of the treaty." 

If the faithful observance of treaties between the 
nations of Europe constitutes the very foundation 
of civilization, is not the faithful observance of 
treaties with Asiatics the foundation of right rela- 
tions with them? In other words, do not treaties 
ratified by Congress have moral aspects which 
should place them on a higher level of authority 
than the ordinary acts of Congress? Disregard by 
Congress of this fundamental principle for the main- 
tenance of right international relations is fraught 
with ominous consequences. Congress, of course. 



CHINA 45 

has the right to abrogate a treaty, but there is a 
right way and also a wrong way to do it. Is it any 
more right for a nation to abrogate an inconvenient 
treaty by simply passing laws in contravention to 
certain of its pledges, than it is for an individual who 
has made a promise to another individual giving 
quid 'pro quo suddenly and without conference to 
ignore that promise? Is it conceivable that Con- 
gress would have treated China as it has, had she 
been equipped, as Japan is to-day, with the instru- 
ments of Occidental civilization ? 

Minister Chang Yeu Hoon writing to Secretary 
Bayard remarked with courteous but biting sar- 
casm: "I was not prepared to learn that there was 
a way recognized in the law and practice of this 
country whereby your country could release itself 
from treaty obligations without consultation or the 
consent of the other party." ^ 

Now when China becomes equipped with a daily 
press and adequate world news, when her national 
organization becomes better unified, more efficient, 
and better equipped, when her self-consciousness is 
more perfectly developed, and when she learns that 
Chinese entering America have often suffered ig- 
nominious treatment, that Chinese lawfully here are 
deprived of rights guaranteed by long-standing trea- 
ties, and that privileges granted as a matter of course 
to individuals of other nations are refused to Chi- 

1 Ihid., p. 183. 



46 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

nese on exclusively racial grounds, is it not as cer- 
tain as the sunrise that Chinese friendship for Amer- 
ica will wane and serious possibilities develop ? 

That Chinese, even those lawfully in the United 
States, are still liable to arrest and deportation un- 
der circumstances that deny them even the most 
rudimentary justice, is made evident by the case of 
Chin Loy You (223 Fed. 833). Judge Morton, of 
Boston, pronounced (February 16, 1915) the follow- 
ing opinion in regard to the methods of our Chinese 
inspection and deportation officials. 

"It is apparent that many of what we are accus- 
tomed to regard as the essential safeguards of in- 
dividual liberty were ignored. The prisoner was 
not allowed to see any of the witnesses against him 
while they were testifying, nor to cross-examine 
them, and he had no power to make them testify 
afterwards. All the oral testimony against the 
prisoner (except his own) was taken behind his back, 
and if not secretly, at least without notice to him or 
to his counsel, although the latter was well known 
to the officers and had reasonably demanded the 
right to be present at the taking of the testimony 
and to cross-examine the witnesses. The petitioner 
was denied the assistance of counsel both before 
and while giving his testimony at the first so-called 
'hearing,' and also at the second 'hearing.' State- 
ments of fact not under oath, made by persons not 
connected with the prisoner or with the Immigra- 
tion Department, and never present at any hearing, 
were used against him. The proceedings plainly 
were not of a judicial character. They cannot be 



CHINA 47 

supported; it seems to me, as legitimate administra- 
tive proceedings, because the officers did not en- 
deavor themselves to ascertain the truth about the 
matter. 

"'The proceedings' are to be viewed as a whole, 
and so viewed, they present to my mind, a plain 
violation of the fundamentals of fair play by the 
immigration inspectors. . . . The actmg secretary, 
instead of disaffirming the illegal conduct of his 
subordinates, approved it and based his decision 
on it. . . . The next case of this kind may be one 
of an American citizen endeavoring to protect him- 
self against exile by administrative order made in 
this way." 

Among the most important constitutional safe- 
guards guaranteeing justice to the individual is the 
famous Fourteenth Amendment. It provides that 
"no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or 
property without due process of law, nor deny to 
any person within its jurisdiction the equal protec- 
tion of the laws." On November 1, 1915, Justice 
Hughes, in a judgment dealing with the law passed 
by the State of Arizona restricting the privileges of 
aliens in regard to employment in order to give 
superior privileges to citizens, pronounced the law 
unconstitutional. He said that "equal protection 
of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal laws." 
(United States Reports 239, p. 33 X.) Has this 
important principle been observed in laws dealing 
with Asiatics ? Should not steps be taken to remove 
from all State legislation those laws that discrim- 



48 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

inate against aliens and especially that discriminate 
between aliens? 

Such in bare outline has been the situation in the 
relations of the United States with China. A New 
China, however, has been born. Though she has 
not yet approached us with any definite requests 
for changes in our laws and our treatment, is it not 
clear that she would be quite justified in doing so? 

But whether she does or not, here is the actual 
appeal of the facts, pathetic, urgent, humiliating, 
ominous. 

How will America meet this appeal? Shall we 
go on our way unheeding? Shall we continue to 
disregard our treaties and humiliate mighty neigh- 
bors across the Pacific? That were an ominous 
course. 

For the next step in this discussion we need to 
consider the history of federal legislation dealing 
with immigration and naturalization. These two 
topics will occupy us in the two following chapters. 



CHAPTER IV 

AN HISTORICAL SKETCH OF LEGISLATION 
DEALING WITH IMMIGRATION 

Immigration and naturalization are closely inter- 
dependent. Without the former there would be no 
possibility of the latter. 

From the beginning of our history until 1875 the 
immigration of aliens was encouraged. No limita- 
tions of any kind were placed upon it for nearly a 
century. When limitations were imposed they were 
imposed on grounds of moral and physical deficien- 
cies, and for economic reasons. 

The Act of March 3, 1875, forbade the importa- 
tion of women for immoral purposes, the supply- 
ing of coolie labor, and the entrance of alien per- 
sons under sentence for felonious crimes other than 
political. 

The Act of August 2, 1882, forbade the admission 
of convicts, lunatics, idiots, or persons unable to 
take care of themselves. 

The Act of February 26, 1885 (amended February 
23, 1887), prohibited the introducton of contract 
labor. 

The Act of March 3, 1891, added the follow- 
ing classes to those forbidden admission: Paupers, 

49 



60 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

persons suffering from a loathsome or dangerous 
contagious disease, persons who had been convicted 
of a felony or other infamous crime or misdemeanor 
involving moral turpitude, polygamists and assisted 
immigrants. 

The Act of March 3, 1903, also added other classes 
to the prohibited list, such as epileptics, persons 
who had been insane within five years, or who had 
had two or more attacks, professional beggars, 
anarchists, prostitutes, procurers, and those previ- 
ously deported. 

The Act of February 5, 1917, which is the most 
comprehensive law that has ever been passed, re- 
afiirmed all the above provisions for exclusion and 
added many others, such as consumptives, defectives 
both mental and physical who are thereby rendered 
imfit to earn a living, persons from certain sections 
of Asia specified by latitude and longitude, and 
aliens over sixteen years of age who cannot read 
some language. 

No people or race has even been excluded by 
name except the Chinese. 

The Chinese Exclusion Act of May 6, 1882, was 
limited in its operation to ten years, and in its scope 
to laborers. It was, however, re-enacted in 1892, 
and again in 1902, for periods of ten years each. In 
1904, as we have already stated in Chapter III, when 
the Chinese Government denounced the treaty of 
1894 which then became terminable. Congress voted 



IMMIGRATION 51 

that "all laws regulating, suspending, or prohibiting 
the coming of Chinese persons ... are hereby re- 
enacted, extended, and continued without modifica- 
tion or condition." 

The Immigration Act of February 5, 1917, in 
addition to many specifications as to physical, 
psychological, and moral defectives who are to be 
excluded, contains, as has just been stated, a com- 
prehensive provision for general restriction, that, 
namely, which describes by latitude and longitude 
certain geographical regions of Asia and adjacent 
islands, natives of which should not be admitted. 
The geographical area referred to does not include 
Japan nor east China, but does include the majority 
of the islands of the Pacific, all India, and the major 
part of the continent of Central Asia. This phrase- 
ology of latitude and longitude was hit upon as a 
substitute for the proposal to exclude "Hindus and 
persons who cannot become eligible under existing 
law to become citizens of the United States by 
naturalization, unless otherwise provided for by 
existing agreements as to passports, or by existing 
treaties, conventions, or agreements that may here- 
after be entered into." 

To this phraseology the Japanese Government had 
objected siace it was believed to be aimed especially 
at the Japanese and was suspected of being a pre- 
lude for annulling the "gentlemen's agreement." 

The exclusion of aliens coming from the specified 



52 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

region is, however, not absolute. Those excepted 
are government officers, ministers, or reHgious 
teachers, missionaries, authors, artists, merchants, 
and travellers for curiosity, their legal wives and 
their children under sixteen. Such persons, however, 
when admitted to the United States, must main- 
tain their status and occupation at the risk of de- 
portation. 

The manifest purpose of the numerous restriction 
provisions of the Act under consideration is the ex- 
clusion of those persons who are physically or morally 
unfit for life among us, and the protection of our in- 
dustrial and manual laborers from a possible vast 
inamigration of ignorant and illiterate laborers from 
lands whose standards of life and economic condi- 
tions might easily cause our people serious difficulties. 

Congress has thus passed six laws restricting im- 
migration on moral, physical, and economic grounds, 
dealing in every case with individual characteristics, 
and nine laws dealing with Chinese. But in none 
of them is there reference to any race or people 
except to Chinese. The law of 1917 is the first one 
to apply a general principle of exclusion to any 
other peoples than to Chinese. It does not, however, 
as we have seen, specify races but regions, and it 
applies the restriction only to laboring classes. 

The restriction of Japanese labor immigration 
which has been rigidly maintained since 1908 was 
undertaken by the Japanese Government in order 



IMMIGRATION 53 

to render unnecessary federal legislation restricting 
Japanese, which legislation no doubt would have 
been passed had the Japanese Government not 
taken its action. 

Such are the principal points in the history of our 
immigration legislation. We must now study the 
history of our legislation dealing with naturalization. 



CHAPTER V 

AN HISTORICAL SKETCH OF LEGISLATION 
DEALING WITH NATURALIZATION 

America aims to be a thoroughgoing democracy. 
This is its ideah The progressive achievement of 
this ideal is shown by the Constitution of the United 
States; by legislation regarding immigration and 
naturahzation; by the Civil War; and by the 
amendments to the Constitution, and to the laws 
of naturalization immediately following that war. 
America does not wish any section of its people to 
be a subject class deprived of political rights. Every 
man permanently residing here should, according to 
our ideal, be a citizen, sharing in the responsibilities 
and duties no less than in the privileges of citizen- 
ship. The idea of a political aristocracy lording it 
over an ignorant and politically helpless mass of 
inferiors is repugnant to us. All government, we 
hold, derives its right to be and to act from the ex- 
pressed will of the people and of aU the people. 

From the very beginning of our national history 

the democratic ideal was in control. Provision was 

promptly made whereby aliens who came to us for 

permanent residence might in due time enter into 

the fellowship of freemen guiding their own poHtical 

destinies. 

54 



NATURALIZATION 55 

The history of our laws dealing with naturaliza- 
tion throws important light upon these matters and 
helps us to see what should be oiu* treatment of 
Asiatics permanently residing in our land. 

The Constitution (Art. I, Sec. 8) provides that 
"Congress shall have power ... to establish an 
Uniform rule of naturalization/' and also "to make 
all laws which shall be necessary and proper for 
carrying into execution the foregoing powers." 

In harmony with this provision, the first law of 
naturalization was passed March 26, 1790. It pro- 
vided that "Any alien being a free white person 
who shall have resided within the limits and under 
the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of 
two years, may be admitted to become a citizen 
thereof." Between 1790 and 1854 Congress passed 
fifteen laws dealing with naturalization, the points at 
issue being exclusively the length of residence and 
other matters as to conditions for acquiring citizen- 
ship. In each case the phrase "free white person" 
was retained without discussion. The period of 
residence required as a qualification for the ac- 
quisition of citizenship varied from two to fourteen 
years. 

The reason for the adoption of the phrase "free 
white person" was manifestly the conviction that 
Indians and slaves, since they did not understand 
our life and political system, were not freemen and, 
therefore, were not fitted to be members of the body 



56 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

politic, nor to exercise the duties and responsibilities 
of citizenship. 

The only reference, however, to a discussion throw- 
ing light upon this point that has been found occurs 
in F. G. Franklin's " Legislative History of Natural- 
ization." In a heated debate (1795) to amend the 
law by lengthening the period of residence, Mr. 
Dexter (Massachusetts) suggested that aliens apply- 
ing for citizenship who hold slaves shall first "re- 
nounce all right to hold such persons in slavery," 
on the ground that slaveholders were not fit per- 
sons to exercise the privileges of suffrage. This 
proposed amendment, however, was dropped be- 
cause of its reflection upon slaveholders who were 
already citizens. 

This makes it clear that the conscious purpose of 
the phrase "free white person" in the natural- 
ization laws was to exclude slaves from citizen- 
ship. 

At the close of the Civil War the naturalization 
law was amended to bring it into harmony with the 
principles established by that war. By the Act of 
July 14, 1870, Section 7, Congress provided that 
"The naturalization laws are hereby extended to 
aliens of African nativity and to persons of African 
descent," Attention should be called especially to 
the word "extended.^^ Does not this word imply 
the removal of all race discrimination from our 
naturalization laws? The problem of Asiatic citizen- 



NATURALIZATION 57 

ship had not at that time been raised. That this 
was the intention of the law is evident from the 
fact that imtil recent times our federal and State 
governments used "white" as a catch-all term to 
include all who were not otherwise classified. This 
is seen to be the case both from the census reports 
and also from many legal documents and court de- 
cisions. 

Judge Lowell discussed (December 24, 1909) the 
meaning of "white persons" exhaustively in the 
case In re Halladjian (174 Fed. 834, 841-844). 

"From all these illustrations, which have been 
taken almost at random, it appears that the word 
'white' has been used in colonial practice, in the 
federal statutes, and in the publications of the 
government to designate persons not otherwise 
classified." "Negroes have never been reckoned 
white; Indians seldom. At one time Chinese and 
Japanese were deemed to be white, but are not 
usually reckoned so to-day." "After the majority 
of Americans had come to believe that great differ- 
ences separated the Chinese and later the Japa- 
nese from other immigrants, these persons were 
no longer classified as white; but while the scope 
of its inclusion has thus been somewhat reduced, 
'white' is still the catch-all word which includes 
all persons not otherwise classified." 

In 1873 the General Statutes of the United 
States underwent a thorough revision, the Act 
of approval being dated June 22, 1874. Title 
(Chapter) XXX of the Revised Statutes, dealing 



58 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

with naturalization, reaffirmed the Act of July 14, 
1870, in the following words: 

"Sec. 2169. The provisions of this Title shall 
apply to aliens of African nativity and to persons of 
African descent." 

It was manifestly the intent of Congress to use 
the terms "aliens of African nativity" and "per- 
sons of African descent" in an enlarging and not in 
a restrictive sense. When, however, it was dis- 
covered that the "Revised Statutes" replaced all 
earlier legislation and were the sole authority for 
legal practice, it was at once apparent that no pro- 
vision had been made for the naturalization of any 
white persons. Those who were being naturahzed 
were receiving citizenship without authority of law ! 
An amending Act was accordingly passed (February 
18, 1875) which read: 

"The provisions of this Title shall apply to aliens 
being free white persons and to aliens of African 
nativity and to persons of African descent." (U. S. 
Revised Statutes, Title XXX, Section 2169.) Un- 
der these laws, therefore, of 1870, 1874, and 1875, it 
is clear that rights of naturalization were given to 
every alien otherwise qualified regardless of race. 
For, as we have seen, they specify or imply only 
two classes of aliens who are to be naturalized, 
"Whites" and "Africans." And since "white" 
is a "catch-all word to include all who are not 



NATURALIZATION '59 

otherwise classified," no room is left for race dis- 
crimination. 

It may be well at this point to instance a few 
cases of Chinese naturalization. The first applica- 
tion for citizenship by a Chinese seems to have 
been in 1854. A Chinese was naturalized in New 
York in 1873. Thirteen applied for citizenship in 
California in 1876. (C/. Brook's Brief.) Accord- 
ing to the census of 1910 (vol. I, p. 1070) there 
were at that date 1,368 naturalized Chinese and 
483 others who had received first papers. 

With the development of the agitation against 
Chinese immigration there went a demand that even 
those Chinese who might otherwise qualify should 
not be given citizenship privileges. Congress ac- 
ceded to this view, and in the law suspending Chi- 
nese labor immigration for ten years it provided 
(May 6, 1882): 

" Sec. 14. That hereafter no State Court or Court 
of the United States shall admit Chinese to citizen- 
ship ; and all laws in conflict with this act are here- 
by repealed." 

This law was later (1894) confirmed by a treaty 
provision, already cited in Chapter III. 

This makes it clear that until 1882 the Act of 
1875 was regarded by Congress as all-inclusive of 
races and that a special Act was needed to exclude 
Chinese from naturalization. 



60 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

No important modifications were made in the 
laws dealing with naturalization until 1906. At 
that time the Acts of Congress dealing with details 
of immigration and naturalization had become so 
many and so confusing, and the influx of aliens had 
become so enormous that Congress set up an en- 
tirely new and complete set of laws for handling 
both immigration and naturalization, establishing 
separate bureaus of immigration and naturalization. 

This Act of June 26, 1906, is entitled 

"An Act to establish a Bureau of Immigration and 
Naturalization, and to provide for a uniform rule for 
the naturalization of aliens." 

The law itself is very complete, expressed in 
about 10,000 words, and describes not only the man- 
ner of admission to citizenship, giving the various 
blank forms to be used, but stating with great pre- 
cision the qualifications essential for naturalization. 

After specifying the courts having jurisdiction, 
Section 4 provides that "an alien may be admitted 
to become a citizen of the United States in the 
following manner and not otherwise," and then, 
strange to say, not only prescribes the manner but 
also the qualifications, mental, morale and others, 
which the candidate must possess. 

The candidate, being not less than eighteen years 
of age, must declare his intention at least two years 
prior to admission. 



NATURALIZATION 61 

A petition in writing must be filed, signed, and 
verified; stating full name, residence, occupation, 
date, and place of birth, place from which he emi- 
grated, date and place of arrival in United States, 
name of the vessel, time and court where he de- 
clared his intention, name of wife, and country of 
her nativity, place of residence; name, place, 
birth, and residence of children. He must set forth 
that he is not a disbeliever in, or opposed to, organ- 
ized government, or a member of, or affiliated with, 
any organization teaching disbelief in, or opposed to, 
organized government, or a polygamist or believer in 
polygamy, and his intention to become a citizen 
and to renounce allegiance to any foreign prince, 
potentate, state, or sovereignty of which he may be 
a subject, 

"and every fact material to his naturalization and 
required to be proved upon the final hearing of his 
application." 

Provision is also made for affidavits of two credible 
witnesses who have personal knowledge of petitioner. 
It must appear to the court that the alien has 
resided continuously in the United States for five 
years, and in the State territory concerned for one 
year, and has behaved as a man of good moral char- 
acter, attached to the principles of the Constitu- 
tion, and well disposed to the good order and happi- 
ness of the same; with the testimony of at least 



62 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

two witnesses on the facts of residence, moral char- 
acter, and occupation. 

He must renounce^any hereditary title or order of 
nobility. 

Section 7 states certain negative qualifications 
that are essential; namely, that he is not a disbe- 
liever in organized government, an anarchist, or a 
polygamist. 

Section 8 requires that he shall be able to speak 
English. 

These many minute specifications imply that they 
constitute "every fact material to naturalization 
and required to be proved upon the final hearing." 

In all this there is not one single reference to race 
either by name or color. 

Comparing the qualifications for naturalization 
established by this Act of June 29, 1906, with the 
provisions for the exclusion of certain classes of aliens 
in the successive laws dealing with immigration, it is 
clear that Congress intended to exclude from the 
country those whom it regarded as not fit for citizen- 
ship. 

Such are the main features of the law under which 
naturalization is now being granted.* 

If, then, the law provides for the naturalization of 
"white persons" and "Africans" and denies it only 
to Chinese, that is to say, if the law provides for the 

* For this summary ^we are indebted to the "Ozawa Brief," pre- 
pared by Withington and Lightfoot. 



NATURALIZATION 63 

naturalization of all except Chinese, how has it come 
to pass that such is not the interpretation and prac- 
tice of the bureau and of the courts? 

The explanation of this situation seems to be as 
follows: 

The Act of June 29, 1906; provided for the repeal 
of Sections 2165, 2167, 2168, and 2173 of Title XXX, 
thus leaving unrepealed the famous Section 2169, 
which authorizes the naturalization of "white per- 
sons," and persons of African "nativity" or "de- 
scent." It was therefore naturally assumed that 
that section constituted one of the provisions 
regulating naturalization. When the Bureau of 
Naturalization printed its manual of instruction to 
clerks of court giving the laws and regulations to 
be followed by them, Section 2169 was naturally 
included. And among the Regulations was one 
(No. 21) requiring that "clerks of court shall not 
receive declarations of intention, or file petitions 
for naturalization from other aliens than white per- 
sons and persons of African nativity or of African 
descent. Any alien other than a Chinese person, 
who claims that he is a white person in the sense in 
which that term is used in Section 2169, Revised 
Statutes, should be allowed, if he insists upon it 
after an explanation is made showing him the risk 
of denial, to file his declaration or his petition, as 
the case may be, leaving the issue to be determined 
by the court." 



64 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

This action of the bureau was, however, not wholly 
arbitrary, for after the passage of the Chinese ex- 
clusion law (1882) a strong tendency had already 
developed in the courts of confounding Chinese 
with Mongolian, contrasting them with Caucasians, 
and of including Japanese among Mongolians. The 
Chinese exclusion law, in other words, gave a start 
to and standing ground for a restrictive interpreta- 
tion of "white persons." 

By these provisions Section 2169 was construed 
as a limitation of privilege to whites, in a narrow 
sense, and to Africans, the primary decision as to 
who are "whites" and "Africans" being left to clerks 
of court. 

It is evident, therefore, from the history of our 
naturalization legislation that until relatively recent 
times the question was never raised as to the race 
significance of the term "white person." Nobody 
ever thought of defining it as "Caucasian" until 
Asiatics from east Asia began to appear and an anti- 
Asiatic movement developed. Desire then arose 
on the part of some to exclude them. 

This is evident, not only from the absence until 
recently of all discussion as to the race qualification 
of applicants for citizenship, but also from the fact 
that men of many races not Caucasian have been 
and still are freely admitted to citizenship. 

According to the popular notion, all the white 
peoples of Europe to-day are descendants of a single 



NATURALIZATION 65 

original white stock; and are, therefore, racially- 
speaking; cousins. Similarly all modern Asiatic 
peoples are supposed to have descended from a 
common ancestral yellow stock and are cousins 
among themselves. All forms, likewise, of the Negro 
race to-day came, it is assumed; from a single black 
ancestral stock, and the various brown and red 
skinned stocks respectively. 

On the basis of this assumed propinquity of blood- 
kinship, each separate people is popularly supposed 
to possess special capacity of assimilation with 
near-by related peoples of the same color, and lack 
of such capacity for assimilation with those not so 
related. 

Modern students, however, do not accept the 
"common sense" anthropology and psychology 
sketched above. They do not recognize an original 
single "white stock," all of whose divergent de- 
scendants are "white." Although the race classi- 
fication of the human race by color may^be popular 
and in some respects convenient, it is far from ac- 
curate. Accuracy requires the terms "European," 
"Asiatic," "African"; i. e., geographical terms 
which do not distinguish races; or Teutonic, Celtic, 
Semitic, Graeco-Latin; Scandinavian, Chinese; Japa- 
nese; Malay, Negro, etc. Color is a function of 
climate, not of race. 

The confusion of "common sense" anthropology 
and even of the Census Bureau becomes strikingly 



66 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

clear when the details of their classification are 
examined. 

The census, for instance, of 1910 (vol. I, p. 975) 
gives the following classification and respective 
numbers of various elements of the "foreign white 
stock" of the population of the United States. It 
includes in the "foreign white stock" all white per- 
sons of foreign birth and all white persons having 
parents "one or both of whom were foreign born." 

English and Celtic 10,037,420 

Germanic (German, Dutch, and Flemish) 9,187,007 

Scandinavian (Swedish, Norwegian, and Danish) 2,902,196 
Latin and Greek (Italian, French, Spanish, Por- 
tuguese, Roumanian, Greek) 4,279,560 

Slavic and Lettic (Pohsh, Bohemian, Slovak, 
Russian, Ruthenian, Slovenian, Serbo-Croa- 
tian, Bulgarian, Lithuanian, etc.) 3,240,467 

Unclassified and Unknown 2,283,688 

Yiddish and Hebrew 1,676,762 

Magyar (Hungarian) 320,893 

Finnish 200,688 

Armenian 30,621 

Syrian and Arabic 46,727 

Turkish 5,441 

Albanian 2,366 

An inspection of this table shows us that of our 
so-called "foreign white stock" about 30,000,000 are 
so-called "Caucasian" and over 2,000,000 (Magyar, 
Semitic, Syrian, Turkish, and others) in reaHty are 
Asiatic. In spite of their Asiatic ancestry, they 
are all classed by our Census Bureau and by " common 



NATURALIZATION 



67 



sense" anthropology as "foreign white stock/' and 
are excluded from the group classed as "Asiatic."^ 

But is citizenship being actually granted to these 
people of Asiatic ancestry? Yes, it is, and without 
question being raised in regard to it. 

The census report (1910, vol. I, p. 1082) gives a 
statistical classification of foreign-bom white males 
twenty-one years of age and over according to their 
citizenship and country of birth, specifying how many 
have been naturalized. The following table pre- 
sents the statistics of "foreign-born white," some of 
whom nevertheless have Asiatic ancestry coming to 
us by way of Europe; those also are included who 
have come to us from Mexico and South America 
who, it is to be noted, are also classed as "foreign 
white stock"! 



FOREIGN-BORN^ WHITE MALES TWENTY-ONE YEARS 
OF AGE AND OVER 



COUNTHT 


Nattt- 

BALIZED 


First 
Papebb 


Alien 


Not Re- 

POKTED 


Total 


In the U. S. as a 
whole 

From Russia 

From Finland . . . 

From Hungary . . 

From Bulgaria, 
etc 


3,034,117 

192,264 

21,669 

36,610 

821 

6,940 
10,932 

1,152 


570,772 
95,562 
11,279 
25,756 

908 

3,363 
2,358 

272 


2,266,535 

385,970 

32,458 

174,518 

14,552 

19,413 
67,930 

1,240 


775,393 

63,824 

5,310 

18,960 

1,243 

2,975 
20,789 

651 


6,646,817 

737,120 

70,716 

255,844 

17,524 

32,691 
102,009 

3,315 


From Turkey in 
Asia 


From Mexico. . . . 

From Central 
and South 
America 



68 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

As this table is based not upon race, but upon 
"country of birth/' it does not strictly show race 
kinship. For instance, not every person born in 
Russia is a Slav, nor in Hungary a Magyar (Hun- 
garian). The facts, however, are sufficiently clear. 
Semites (Jews, Syrians, and Arabs), Turks, Finns, 
and Hungarians, Mexicans and South Americans 
are all regarded as "white" and are being given 
citizenship freely and without question. 

According to the regular practice, therefore, of 
our courts, the term "free white person" has been 
as a rule interpreted liberally. 

In the face of these generous practices which have 
been going on for decades, is it not somewhat absurd 
that our courts, when dealing with Japanese, should 
now hold that "free white person" is to be inter- 
preted narrowly so as to include only Caucasians or 
Arians ? 

Further reason for holding that "free white per- 
son" is a general inclusive term, not a specifically 
defined inclusive and exclusive term, is found in 
the difficulties experienced by the courts in striving 
to administer the law since the adoption of the 
latter interpretation. This difficulty and the re- 
sulting confusion were ^carefully discussed (June 
24, 1913) by Judge Smith, of the East District 
Court of South Carolina, in the case Ex parte 
Shahid (205 Fed. 812). After asking what a 
" white " person is, what an " alien of African nativ- 



NATURALIZATION 69 

ity" is (would a Chinese born in Africa come under 
this head?), and what a "person of African descent" 
is (would a person one-half or one-quarter or three- 
quarters Negro, but born in China or Japan, India or 
Persia, come under this head?), the learned judge 
proceeds as follows: 

"The language of the statute is about as open to 
many constructions as it possibly could be. . . . 
The statute as it stands is most uncertain, ambigu- 
ous, and difficult both of construction and applica- 
tion. . . . There have been a number of decisions 
in which the question (as to the meaning of 'white 
person') has been treated and the conclusions ar- 
rived at in them are as unsatisfactory as they are 
varying. After considering them all in an attempt 
to evolve, if possible, some definite rule for judicial 
decision, the conclusion that this court has arrived 
at is as follows : 

"That the meaning of 'free white persons' is to 
be such as would naturally have been given to it 
when used in the first Naturalization Act of 1790 — 
i. e., 'persons belonging to the European races.' 
... It would not mean a 'Caucasian Race' . . . 
nor would it mean an 'Arian Race,' a word prac- 
tically unknown to comimon usage in 1790. ... It 
would not mean 'Indo-European' races as sometimes 
ethnologically at the present day defined, as includ- 
ing the present mixed Indo-European, Hindu, Ma- 
lay, and Dravidian inhabitants of East India and 
Ceylon; nor the peoples who inhabit Persia. It 
would mean such persons as were in 1790 known as 
white Europeans with their descendants in other 
countries to which they have emigrated. It includes 
all European Jews . . . more or less intermixed with 



70 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

peoples of Celtic, Scandinavian, Teutonic, Iberian, 
Latin, Greek, and Slavic descent. It includes Mag- 
yars, Lapps, and Finns who are of Ugric stock, and 
the Basques and Albanians. It includes the mixed 
Latin, Celtic-Iberian, and Moorish inhabitants of 
Spain and Portugal, the mixed Greek, Latin, Phoeni- 
cian, and North African inhabitants of Sicily, and the 
mixed Slav and Tartar inhabitants of South Russia. 

"To say that a very dark brown, almost black, 
inhabitant of India is entitled to rank as a white 
person because of a possible or hypothetical infusion 
of white blood thirty or forty centuries old, and to 
exclude a Chinese or a Japanese whose parent, on 
one side was white, and who thus possesses mani- 
festly at least one-half European blood, would seem 
highly inconsistent. 

" One Syrian may be of pure, or almost pure Jew- 
ish, Turkish, or Greek blood, and another the pure- 
blooded descendant of an Egyptian, an Abyssinian, 
or a Sudanese. How is the court to decide. It 
would be most unfortunate if the matter were left to 
the conclusions of a judge based on ocular inspec- 
tion. . . . Under the construction of the statute 
above fixed, a modern Syrian of Asiatic birth and 
descent would not be entitled ... to be naturalized 
as a citizen of the United States." 

Let us now note that Sjo-ians have, nevertheless, 
been admitted to citizenship by action of the courts 
(174 Fed. 735, December 1, 1909, and 179 Fed. 1002, 
July 11, 1910). And Hindus also (In re U. S. vs. 
Doha, 1910, 177 Fed. 101, and In re Mozumdar, 
207 Fed. 115, July 11, 1912), and Parsees (In re 
U. S. vs. Balsara, 180 Fed. 694, July, 1910). 



NATURALIZATION 71 

The Standard citations of Japanese rejections are 
In re Saito, 62 Fed. 126, June 24, 1894, and In re 
Young, 195 Fed. 645, April 24, 1912. But it is im- 
portant to note that many Japanese have also been 
admitted to citizenship. According to the census 
of 1910 (vol. I, p. 1070) 420 Japanese are recorded as 
having been naturalized, and 387 as possessing first 
papers at the time of the census. 

The distinguished international lawyer, author, 
and editor, Musuji Miyakawa, holding the degree 
of LL.D. from the Indiana State University, was 
admitted to citizenship by Honorable James B. 
Wilson, judge in the Monroe Circuit Court of the 
State of Indiana, October 9, 1905. Tanean Matsu 
Matsuki also was given citizenship by naturaliza- 
tion in the United States District Court, of the 
Northern District of Florida, April 9, 1907, by the 
Honorable Charles Swayne, judge. 

Certain Japanese who had already been granted 
citizenship have had that status revoked. Mr. 
Takuji Yamashita, for instance, was given citizen- 
ship papers on May 14, 1902, by the Superior Court 
of the State of Washington. He later applied for 
admission to the bar as an attorney in the State of 
Washington. It was held that the court which 
had previously granted him his citizenship papers 
had exceeded its powers, and, therefore, not only 
was his application refused, but his citizenship 
papers revoked (59 L. R. A. 671, 70 Pac. 482). 



72 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

The reason given by the court for refusing natu- 
ralization to Shibata Saito was that "he was of the 
Mongohan race and that the term 'white person' 
excluded the Mongolian race" (62 Fed. 126); in spite 
of the fact that the laws nowhere mention Mon- 
golians. The naturalization laws deal exclusively 
with "free white persons," persons of "African 
birth" or "descent," and "Chinese." The only 
law excluding any person by race, as already stated, 
refers to Chinese. 

We have already referred to the regulation re- 
quiring clerks of court to refuse applications from 
any aliens save "whites" and "Africans." Such an 
order, however, could have been considered neces- 
sary only on the supposition that the clerks were 
receiving applications and the courts were giving 
naturalization to those whom the strict construc- 
tionists did not regard as "free white persons." 

The courts, moreover, have deliberately granted 
citizenship in spite of their own admission that the 
applicant was neither white nor African! A strik- 
ing case is that of the Mexican Rodriguez (81 Fed. 
337). He was able neither to read nor write, nor 
did he understand the Constitution, but being peace- 
able, industrious, law-abiding, and of good moral 
character, he was admitted. The court held that 
though he was "debarred by the strict letter of the 
law' from receiving citizenship," yet he was in fact 
"embraced within the intent and meaning of the 
statute." "If he falls within the intent and mean- 



NATURALIZATION 73 

ing of the law, his appHcation should be granted, 
notwithstanding the letter of the statute may be 
against him," for "whatever might be his status 
viewed solely from the standpoint of the ethnologist, 
a Mexican is embraced within the intent of our nat- 
uralization laws!" 

"The Utah court held that a Hawaiian, not be- 
ing of the Caucasian or white race, or of the African 
race, was excluded. The court seemed to include 
the Hawaiians as Mongolians. {In re Kanaka Nian, 
6 Utah 259, 21 Pac. 993) ; Judge Maxey admitted 
a copper-colored Mexican, who apparently was an 
Indian of unmixed blood, holding that Judge Saw- 
yer's decision might well be limited to members of 
the Mongolian race, and while the applicant would 
not be, by any strict scientific classification, classed 
as white, he fell within the liberal intent of the stat- 
ute, as shown by the course of the United States 
Government in annexation and treaty, citing Lynch 
vs. Clarke as to the liberal policy {In re Rodriguez, 
81 Fed. 337). Judge Maxey cites the Acts establish- 
ing territorial government for New Mexico and 
Utah, each of which use the expression ' free white ' 
to describe those entitled to vote, but which in the 
same section clearly recognize, as included in that 
definition, Mexicans who are not white or of the 
Caucasian race (p. 352). 

" The poHcy of the United States has been to in- 
clude into its citizenship by annexation vast num- 
bers of members of races not Caucasian, including 
many Mongolian. The annexation of Hawaii con- 
verted thousands of Japanese, not to mention other 
nationalities, into American citizens."^ 

* Brief Ozawa vs. United States Ninth Circuit Court, pp. 66-67. 



74 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

This confusion is perhaps greatest in the decisions 
respecting applicants for naturalization coming from 
colonies ceded to us by Spain after the war of 1898. 
It has been held that a Filipino was ineligible to 
citizenship in the United States — although a " citizen 
of the Philippine Islands," whatever that may mean 
(In re Alverto). And exactly the contrary has also 
been held {In re Mallari). These decisions are 
based on the construction of a special section in the 
Act of 1906; and stand somewhat to one side of the 
present discussion. They serve, however, to em- 
phasize the practical difficulties of making racial 
ancestry a test of admissibility. If the excluding 
decisions be correct, the result is to establish an in- 
ferior class among persons born under our flag and 
owing allegiance to the United States. If the con- 
trary decisions are correct, Chinese and Japanese 
can be admitted to citizenship if they happen to be 
born in a dependency. Of course, if born in this 
country, of parents domiciled here, they are natural- 
born citizens, with the same rights as any others. 

That Congress has never intended to exclude 
Japanese from privileges of naturaHzation is manifest 
from a consideration not only of the fact that no 
reference has ever been made to them in connection 
with the passage of any naturalization laws what- 
soever, but also from antecedent probabilities. 
When the laws of 1870, 1873, and 1875 were passed, 
Japanese immigration had not yet begun. The 



NATURALIZATION 75 

total number of Japanese in America in 1870 was 47, 
and in 1880 was only 134. The exclusion of Japa- 
nese could not have been in the mind of any member 
of Congress. Moreover, as we have already seen, 
the laws of 1875 were inclusive of races, not exclusive. 
In 1895 (March 21) a treaty was made with Japan. 
Four months earlier (December 8, 1894) a treaty 
had been made with China providing that Chinese 

"either permanentty or temporarily residing in the 
United States shall have, for the protection of 
their persons and property, all the rights that are 
given by the laws of the United States to citizens 
of the most favored nation, excepting the right to 
become naturalized citizens." 

The treaty with Japan, however, made no such 
limitation. It provided that 

"the citizens or subjects of each of the two high 
contracting parties shall have full liberty to enter, 
travel, or reside in any part of the territories of the 
other contracting party, and shall enjoy full and 
perfect protection for their persons and property." 

Comparison of these two paragraphs shows that 
the "right to become naturalized citizens" is by 
implication included in the rights given to aliens 
"for the protection of their persons and property." 
Experience, moreover, justifies this implication. 
In a democracy like America neither the persons nor 
the property of "aliens ineligible for naturaUzation " 



76 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

is as safe as the persons and property of eligible 
aliens. 

When the "uniform rule" of June 29, 1906, was 
passed, Japan had just finished her victorious war 
with Russia and was at the very "crest of the wave" 
of her popularity and friendship in the United States. 
At such a time it is inconceivable that Congress, 
without cause (for the difficulties in California first 
became acute late in 1907), would have enacted a 
law "intending to affront one of the most sensitive, 
warlike, and progressive nations on the face of the 
earth by declaring that its members were not fit for 
American citizenship." ^ 

In the thoroughgoing survey of this entire ques- 
tion presented in his brief on the Ozawa case, Mr. 
Withington comes to the conclusion that "white 
persons" means those persons who are "fit for citi- 
zenship and of the kind admitted to citizenship by 
the policy of the United States."^ 

Even so recently as February, 1917, when Congress 
passed the most drastic and exclusive immigration 
laws that have ever been enacted in the United 
States, it took particular pains not to enact any 
phrase possibly implying Japanese ineligibility for 
citizenship. A phrase that might perhaps be so 
interpreted was deliberately dropped at the request 
of the Department of State (which had received a 
protest from the Japanese Government), and a 

1 "Ozawa Brief," p. 30. 2 p. 57. 



NATURALIZATION 77 

clause was inserted in its place specifying by latitude 
and longitude those to whom immigration would be 
refused. The debates in Congress in connection 
with that bill show how solicitous its members were 
to avoid even a possible implication that Japanese 
were an inferior people, unfit for our life and, there- 
fore, ineligible for naturalization. 

Historically speaking, therefore, and also in the 
major part of the practice of our courts, the term 
"free white person" in our naturahzation law is an 
inclusive, not an exclusive term. It includes all 
races except the black and others that may be 
specifically mentioned. When slavery ceased, citi- 
zenship by naturalization was "extended to aliens 
of African nativity and persons of African descent." 
The implicit intention evidently was to grant the 
privilege of citizenship by naturalization to all 
races — from the extreme white to the extreme black. 

With the advent, however, of Chinese and Japa- 
nese immigration, a new problem has arisen that 
had not been considered either in 1790, when the 
first law of naturalization was passed, nor at any 
later date, even in 1870, when the law of naturaliza- 
tion was "extended" to include Africans. Under 
the stress of the new situation caused by Asiatic im- 
migration and an anti- Asiatic movement a tendency 
has recently developed, and has been officially 
authorized by the courts, to interpret the term "free 
white person" in a narrow and exclusive sense when 



78 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

it comes to dealing with Asiatics coming directly 
from east Asia. The thought has not yet occurred 
to interpret it strictly in dealing with Asiatics who 
come to us by way of Europe (Turks, Huns, Finns, 
Syrians, Persians, Hindus, Semites). 

When the courts began to apply the narrower in- 
terpretation of "white" to the races they soon 
found themselves in immense confusion. Some 
strove to use it as a term distinctive of race, others 
as a term distinctive of color, and still others as a 
term distinctive of geographical locality. 

In view of the confusion disclosed above it is time 
for a full, fresh, and frank discussion of the attitude 
that America should take to the various races of 
mankind. What exactly are the fundamental ideals 
and principles upon which the United States has 
been founded? Are they ideals and principles that 
we should carry out, or should we modify them ? 

Whether or not the privileges of naturalization 
should be granted to Asiatics and to men of every 
race entirely upon personal qualifications, and re- 
gardless of race, is a problem that should be argued 
on the broadest grounds and from the widest out- 
look. Even if it could be conclusively shown that 
"free white persons" in the original law was specifi- 
cally intended to include Asiatics, that would not 
be a reason for granting them those privileges if 
the reasons against it now are sound. And con- 
versely, even though the founders of our republic 



NATURALIZATION 79 

consciously intended to exclude every race save 
European whites, that should not prevent us from 
broadening our outlook and treatment of the great 
races of Asia, should the new era of human history 
upon which mankind is rapidly entering require it. 

In view of the modern world as described in our 
first chapter, and of the many facts and considera- 
tions presented in this and the intervening chapters, 
we contend that the time has come for the United 
States to adopt a new poHcy in regard both to immi- 
gration and to naturalization. Let us establish the 
rigid regulation of immigration from every country, 
fixing the annual maximum permissible immigration 
on the basis of their Americanization. Let us estab- 
lish high standards of naturalization and provide 
for their strict administration. On the basis of this 
rigid regulation of immigration and naturalization, 
let us amend our laws dealing with eligibility for 
citizenship so as to give this privilege to every in- 
dividual who qualifies regardless of his race or place 
of birth. 

Such a policy as this, we contend, is required by 
American ideals of thoroughgoing democracy. To 
the consideration of this contention the following 
chapter is devoted. 

Note: The author is indebted to the " Ozawa Brief" for many impor- 
tant suggestions. Mr. Ozawa took out liis first papers in California in 1902 
and applied for naturalization in Honolulu in 1915. Upon refusal, at the 
recommendation of the local court he appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court. 
This Brief argues that the Act of 1906 is a " vmiform rule " and is not con- 
trolled by Section 2169, which section applies only to those " specially ex- 
cepted classes provided for in the unrepealed sections in Title XXX." The 
case has already gone to the Supreme Court but is not likely to be taken up 
before the autumn of 1918. 



CHAPTER VI 
DEMOCRACY AND CITIZENSHIP 

New Japan and New China have rendered obso- 
lete the past policies of the United States in deal- 
ing with those peoples. In seeking, however, to 
formulate the nature and the specific forms of the 
new policy now needed, many principles and fac- 
tors must be kept in mind. 

The new policy must be in harmony with the fun- 
damental principles of the Constitution of the United 
States no less than with the general principles of 
human right and justice. The United States is en- 
gaged in one of the most important experiments in 
government that has ever been made — democracy. 
We are under obligations not only in loyalty to our 
ancestors to carry through this experiment to 
genuine and full success, but we are under still 
greater obligations to our descendants and, indeed, 
to all the world; for their permanent weal or woe 
depends in no slight degree on the success or failure 
of our experiment. 

We are imder obligations, therefore, to eliminate 
just so far as we possibly can those factors that 
threaten its success. Beyond question one of the 
most important and difficult of these factors is that 

80 



DEMOCRACY AND CITIZENSHIP 81 

of race. Democracy among a people thoroughly- 
homogeneous as to race is difficult enough even at 
the best. Where different peoples and races are in- 
volved the difficulty is vastly increased. This is one 
of the difficulties with which we are faced to-day. 

How shall we deal with it? No more important 
practical question at present confronts our states- 
men, our legislators, and the rank and file of our 
citizenship; for in a democracy every citizen has his 
responsibility in shaping its policies and in framing 
its laws. 

Now that the world has become so small and all 
its parts so wonderfully accessible each to the other; 
now that its commercial and industrial unity has 
become so intricate and interdependent; now that 
each important race and people has developed not 
only self-consciousness, but amazing powers of ex- 
pansion, the problems of race loom up as never be- 
fore in human history. 

If America, with its vast' and imperfectly assimi- 
lated populations of diverse peoples from Europe 
and Africa, west Asia and Mexico, is to make a 
success of its democracy, she must understand her 
problem more clearly, and with adequate principles 
and convictions she must grapple with it intelligently. 

What, then, are the fundamental principles and 
ideals upon which the republic of the United States 
was founded, by which it lives, and upon the thor- 
ough application of which alone it can prosper? 



82 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all 
men are created equal, that they are endowed by 
their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that 
among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of 
happiness. That to secure these rights, governments 
are instituted among men, deriving their just powers 
from the consent of the governed." 



So spoke the founders of the republic in their his- 
toric "Declaration of Independence." The Con- 
stitution of the United States sought to embody 
these fundamental principles in concrete form. 
Elaborate provisions were made for representative 
government by which not only to secure for as- 
sured majorities the final right to direct the govern- 
ment, but also to secure to minorities and especially 
to individuals their inalienable rights and liberties, 
which no majorities might take away. As time 
went on, however, a profound divergence of opinion 
and practice developed in regard to the Negro. A 
great civil war was fought over two fundamental 
questions — 

First: Are we a true nation or a loose federation 
from which States may secede at will ? 

Second: Is our government to be thoroughly and 
genuinely democratic, or is it to be aristocratic ? 

From the midst of that war there came an ever- 
memorable utterance calling the nation back to its 
ideal. "Four score and seven years ago," said our 
great President of the Civil War, "our forefathers 



DEMOCRACY AND CITIZENSHIP 83 

brought forth on this continent a new nation, dedi- 
cated to the proposition that all men are created 
equal." 

And after the war was over important amend- 
ments were made to the Constitution, and to the 
laws of the United States, seeking to express more 
adequately and to embody more perfectly in the 
fundamental law of the land the ideals and prin- 
ciples upon which this nation was established. 
Among the most important of these were the 
Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments 
to the Constitution, and the amendment of the law 
specifying who were ehgible for citizenship by nat- 
uralization. 

The Thirteenth Amendment forbade slavery and 
involuntary servitude. 

The Fourteenth Amendment provided that "All 
persons born or naturalized in the United States 
and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens 
of the United States and of the State wherein they 
reside. No State shall make or indorse any law 
which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of 
citizens of the United States; nor shall any State 
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property with- 
out due process of law; nor deny to any person within 
its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." 

And the Fifteenth Amendment provided that 
"the rights of citizens of the United States to vote 
shall not be denied or abridged by the United States 



84 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

or by any State, on account of race, color or previous 
condition of servitude." 

The amendment of the law in regard to naturaliza- 
tion provides (July 14, 1870) that "the Naturaliza- 
tion laws are hereby extended to aliens of African 
nativity and to persons of African descent." 

These citations from the fundamental laws of the 
land establish the following as the general principles 
and ideals of our government: 

1. All men, regardless of race or place of birth, 
are created equal. 

2. They are endowed by their Creator with cer- 
tain rights that are inahenable; that is, rights which 
belong to them as persons regardless of race; rights, 
moreover, which governments do not create. 

3. Governments may not pass laws that arbitrarily 
or wantonly interfere with or abridge these inalien- 
able rights. 

4. All persons, regardless of race, if born in the 
United States, are by that fact alone citizens of the 
United States, and of the State in which they re- 
side. 

5. All citizens of the United States, regardless of 
race, are entitled to vote, which right "shall not be 
denied or abridged by the United States" as a whole 
nor by any individual State "on account of race, 
color or previous condition of servitude." 

6. All persons in the United States and subject to 
its jurisdiction, whatever be their race, and whether 



DEMOCRACY AND CITIZENSHIP 85 

or not they are citizens of the United States, are en- 
titled to "the equal protection of the laws." 

7. Neither our Constitution, our laws, nor our 
general system and theory of government con- 
template the presence among us of a permanent, 
ahen population, ineligible for citizenship. Our 
entire political structure rests upon the assumption 
that all adult males are possessed of the suffrage. 
Many States now include all adult females among 
those who have suffrage rights. 

8. And finally, since the Civil War, and especially 
since 1870, when naturalization privileges were 
"extended" to persons of African birth or descent, 
the implicit assumption of previous decades has be- 
come more pronounced that any man who will 
qualify for citizenship may secure that privilege. 

Light may also be thrown on the subject of this 
chapter from certain sections of our treaties with 
China. 

The treaty commonly known as the "Burlingame 
Treaty" (1868), already quoted in Chapter III, 
contained three articles of special significance in this 
connection. They contain "a strong recognition 
of the inherent and inalienable rights of man to 
change his home and his allegiance." This treaty 
"was regarded by the whole nation as a grand tri- 
umph of American diplomacy and principles, and 
Mr. Burlingame, on his return to San Francisco, 
received an extraordinary ovation as a benefactor 



86 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

of his country . . . and for having secured from 
China a recognition of what many called the great 
'American doctrine' of the inherent and inaKenable 
right of man to change his home and his allegiance." 
When the question of restricting Chinese immigra- 
tion to the United States was under discussion in 
Congress, Senator Oliver P. Morton delivered a 
notable address on the bearing of the theory and 
practice of our government upon the proposed pro- 
hibition. From that valuable discussion I take the 
following suggestive paragraphs: 

"It is our proudest boast that American institu- 
tions are not arbitrary in their character; are not 
the simple creations of force and circumstance, but 
based upon great and eternal doctrines of the 
equality and natural rights of men. The founda- 
tion-stone in our political edifice is the declaration 
that all men are equal; that they are endowed by 
their Creator with inalienable rights; that among 
these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; 
that to obtain these, governments are instituted 
among men, deriving their just powers from the 
consent of the governed." 

"The limitation of the right to become naturalized 
to white persons was placed in the law when slavery 
was a controlling influence in our government, was 
maintained by the power of that institution, and is 
now retained by the lingering prejudices growing out 
of it. After having abolished slavery and by amend- 
ments to our Constitution and the enactment of 
various statutes establishing the equal civil and 
political rights of all men, without regard to race or 



DEMOCRACY AND CITIZENSHIP 87 

color, and, at a time when we are endeavoring to over- 
come the prejudices of education and of race, and to 
secure to colored men the equal enjoyment of their 
rights, it would be inconsistent and unsound policy to 
renew and reassert the prejudices against race." 

"As Americans, standing upon the great doctrine 
to which I have referred, and seeking to educate 
the masses into their belief, and charged with the 
administration of the laws by which equal rights and 
protection shall be extended to all races and condi- 
tions, we cannot now safely take a new departure 
which, in another form, shall resurrect and re- 
establish those odious distinctions of race which 
brought upon us the late Civil War, and from which 
we fondly hoped that God in his providence had 
delivered us forever." 

"But before entering upon the discussion of any 
other principles, I may be permitted to observe 
that, in my judgment, the Chinese cannot be pro- 
tected in the Pacific States while remaining in their 
alien condition. Without representation in the 
legislature or Congress, without a voice in the selec- 
tion of officers, and surrounded by fierce and, in 
many respects, unscrupulous enemies, the law will 
be found insufficient to screen them from persecu- 
tion. Complete protection can be given them only 
by allowing them to become citizens and acquire 
the right of suffrage, when their votes would become 
important in elections, and their persecutions, in 
great part, converted into kindly solicitation." ^ 

After these words were uttered, and in spite of 
their solemn warning, the anti-Chinese movement in 
the United States grew to such proportions that, 

^ Forty-fifth Congress, 2d Session, Senate Misc. Doc, 20. 



88 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

not only was Chinese immigration stopped and citi- 
zenship forbidden by special Act of Congress, in 
1882, but later legislation became so drastic that its 
constitutionality and harmony with the treaty was, 
as we saw in the preceding chapter, tested by Chi- 
nese appeal to our courts. 

For more than thirty years now the situation of 
the Chinese in the United States has been humiliating 
to them and shameful for us. We have been fla- 
grantly disregarding fundamental principles of our 
national life, throwing doubt on our loyalty to those 
principles, and raising the question whether or not 
we shall be able to carry out to their completion the 
splendid democratic ideals of our forefathers. 

Recent events, however, have served to accentuate 
afresh our national ideals. We have entered the 
world war "to make the world safe for democracy," 
to use President Wilson's memorable phrase. His 
great war "Message" of April 2, 1917, throws no 
little light on the principles and ideals upon which 
this nation was founded and for which it to-day 
stands before the world in a new way. 



"But the right is more precious than peace, and 
we shall fight for the things which we have always 
carried nearest our hearts — ^for democracy, for the 
right of those who submit to authority to have a 
voice in their own governments, for the rights and 
liberties of small nations, for a universal dominion of 
right by such a concert of free peoples as shall bring 



DEMOCRACY AND CITIZENSHIP 89 

peace and safety to all nations and make the world 
itself at last free." 

"To such a task we can dedicate our lives and 
our fortunes, everything that we are and everything 
that we have, with the pride of those who know that 
the day has come when America is privileged to 
spend her blood and her might for the principles that 
gave her birth and happiness, and the peace which 
she has treasured. God helping her, she can do no 
other." 

In these ringing words and in many others equally 
impressive and incisive our great President has 
stressed again and again our fimdamental national 
ideals of "right" and "justice," of "liberty" and 
"democracy," of fair dealing and truthfulness, de- 
nouncing national deceit, arbitrariness, selfishness, 
and autocracy. 

But is it not clear that, if "the world is to be made 
safe for democracy," democracies must themselves 
carry out their fundamental principles in dealing 
with minorities, especially when they consist of 
aliens? Do aliens have "inalienable rights"? 
What are they? How may they be secured in law 
and in practice? 

These are questions of increasingly pressing in- 
sistence and importance, now that the world has 
grown so small and the increasing contact of peoples 
and races has become so intimate and intricate. Can 
democracy be permanently maintained and made 
safe for the world unless the rights of minorities 



90 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

and of aliens within each democracy are safe- 
guarded? Can America expect Austria-Hungary, 
the Balkan States, Turkey, or even Germany to treat 
fairly their respective minorities if America cannot, 
or will not, herself do so ? 

China and Russia are fairly started on their experi- 
ments in democracy. Shall America set them an 
example of fair deahng with race minorities and point 
the only road that can possibly lead to success, 
through a thoroughgoing application of the funda- 
mental principles of democracy, or shall America 
prove a blind guide, stumbling along a devious path 
of arrogance, selfishness, and injustice in dealing 
with aHen minorities, a path that leads inevitably 
to ever-recurring race conflicts and tragedies ? 

These are the alternatives confronting us to-day. 

We turn next to the question of the rights and 
duties of nations as related especially to problems 
raised by race difference and immigration. 



CHAPTER VII 
THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NATIONS 

Race difference, race pride, and race prejudice 
are closely interrelated. They are, moreover, physi- 
ological and psychological facts of immense impor- 
tance in human life. So long as races remained in 
their natural homes these facts constituted no special 
problem. The problem arises when trade and immi- 
grations develop. So long as races continue and 
have intercourse, race difference, pride, and preju- 
dice will constitute important factors in their activi- 
ties and history. 

A new era, however, has begun. Geographical 
barriers between races have disappeared. Multi- 
tudinous varieties of mankind are not only face to 
face economically and politically, but are rapidly 
intermixing their populations. Economic necessi- 
ties, opportunities, and ambitions are carrying multi- 
tudes of one people into the lands of other peoples. 
Problems of a serious nature are thus arising. 

Whereas in ancient times the conquest of one 

people by another took place by means of superior 

martial force, such conquest may now be made by 

the mere fact of migration. New England furnishes 

a striking illustration of this latter method in process 

of realization. 

91 



92 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

In the light of this modern situation due to van- 
ished geographical barriers and to easy migrations 
of races, what are the rights and the duties of na- 
tions? Has any people an inherent right to mi- 
grate where it will regardless of previous occupants ? 
And has any people a right to possess in self- 
ishness its own vast, fertile, and sparsely settled 
territory, and to exclude immigrants from lands 
heavily peopled and possessing slight natural re- 
sources ? 

A full discussion of this intricate question, how- 
ever, is no part of the plan of this volume. We 
desire merely to state in briefest, and therefore it 
must be in dogmatic, form the principal positions 
which are felt to be both right and necessary. The 
following principles as to the rights and duties of 
nations seem to be self-evident : 

1. Races and peoples have certain inherent and 
inalienable rights, such as the rights to life, to liberty, 
to growth, and to the determination and pursuit 
of their own cultural ends. 

2. These rights, however, are subject to the 
limitations of good-neighborliness. And, in these 
modern days, all nations and races are neighbors 
and should be neighborly. 

3. Races and peoples have also certain inescapable 
duties. No longer are they free to carry on their 
lives in total disregard of the interests and needs 
of others. They are in fact members one of an- 



RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NATIONS 93 

other. None liveth to himself alone. The strong 
should bear the burdens of the weak. Those that 
are advanced must in patience and good-will aid 
those that are backward and undeveloped. 

4. Each nation and people should keep order and 
administer even-handed justice to all within its 
jurisdiction — to citizens and to aliens alike. Failure 
in this limits, and may in extreme cases suspend, the 
right to Hberty and may impose the duty upon some 
neighbor or neighbors of taking control of the 
government which fails to perform its duty. 

5. No nation has the right selfishly to close its 
doors completely and absolutely against the rest, 
whether collectively or discriminatively. For no 
siagle people is complete in itself. Each needs all 
the rest for its own fullest life, and each has its 
duty to all. The mutual interchange of industrial 
products and cultural achievements is essential for 
mutual welfare. 

6. Each nation is entitled to establish such re- 
strictions of trade or migration as threaten economic, 
industrial, political, or social disaster. Such trade 
and migration as do not harm its neighbors are 
inahenable rights of each people. 

7. In the past, each people has been its own sole 
judge as to what trade and what immigration are 
desirable and what are harmful. Each has decided 
these questions from entirely selfish considerations. 
The time has come when these matters should be 



94 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

settled by mutual conference, guided by principles 
of mutual consideration and the highest welfare of 
the whole. Should not all legislation of any nation, 
restricting within its territory the privileges of oth- 
ers, receive for final sanction the approval of an in- 
ternational commission ? 

8. Immigrants who go to a land practically un- 
possessed by a people having settled government 
may properly regard themselves as colonists and 
their new territory as an acquisition for their people 
and government. 

9. Immigrants, however, who go to a land already 
effectively possessed and governed are not entitled 
to regard themselves as colonists. It is their duty, 
if they plan to stay permanently in their new home, 
to adapt themselves to the life of its people and to 
be assimilated to the same. 

10. Any people receiving alien immigrants has 
the right to limit such immigration to a point of 
efficient assimilation, thus avoiding the dangers and 
difficulties inevitable when large groups of peoples 
of different customs, language, ideas, and religion 
occupy a common territory. 

11. Immigrants to any land, lawfully admitted, 
can rightly claim a treatment that is friendly and 
fair. Aliens may not seek to upset the government 
nor to injure the economic conditions of the land 
where they are guests, nor may they claim as an 
inherent right a share in its government. 



RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NATIONS 95 

12. A nation admitting to its territory immigrants 
from different peoples and races is under obligation 
to give them equal treatment and opportunity. 
Discrimination of privileges, granting to individuals 
of one people what is denied to individuals of another 
people, a discrimination based exclusively on race 
difference, cannot fail to be regarded as unfair and 
unjust. 

The above paragraphs do not,"of course, cover the 
whole range of the rights and duties of nations and 
peoples, but they indicate sufficiently the general 
principles that seem to the writer to underlie the 
right relations of peoples in regard to immigration 
and, in a democracy like the United States, to 
naturalization. 

In general, the policy to be more completely stated 
in the next chapter rests upon the assumption that 
a nation (in this case the United States) has the in- 
herent right to restrict immigration from any and 
every people, which threatens to bring harm either 
economic, political, or social. To those immigrants 
whom it has permitted to enter, it is, however, under 
obligations to give, regardless of their race, a fair 
opportunity and a square deal. It should help them 
to make good. It should help them to fit themselves 
into the life of the land they have adopted. 

For its own sake, a country like America, which 
is the Eldorado now of all peoples and races of the 
earth, should so regulate immigration as to prevent 



96 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

the coining of more than can be properly American- 
ized. The degree and the rapidity of the American- 
ization of those already admitted from any partic- 
ular people or race should be the gauge by which to 
reckon the number of newcomers that may annually 
be admitted from that same race or people. 

Having admitted immigrants from various races 
and peoples, America is under moral obligations to 
give them such opportunity and treatment as will 
incorporate them most wholesomely and rapidly 
into their new home. This means a treatment free 
from race discrimination. Such a policy and method 
are not only matters of right and duty, but are also 
matters of enlightened self-interest. 

A more detailed statement of this policy and pro- 
gramme we give in the following chapter. This, 
however, is the fitting place in which to consider the 
claims of those alien races which ask for free, or at 
least for large, immigration to this land. 

Many Japanese, for instance, find difficulty in see- 
ing in American rejection of free Asiatic immigra- 
tion any reason but that of selfishness and race 
prejudice. Their argument runs somewhat as fol- 
lows: If Europeans had the right two and three 
hundred years ago to enter America freely in spite 
of the presence of Indians, and if unlimited immi- 
gration is allowed to-day from any land of Europe, 
and from any class of its people, have not Japanese 
the same inherent right to come to this land ? Does 



RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NATIONS 97 

not Japan's heavy population of nearly 400 to the 
square mile give her an inherent right to send her 
emigrants to a land whose population is less than 
40, and large sections of it less than 10, to the square 
mile? 

These are confessedly difficult questions of inter- 
national rights and duties. It is no part of our pur- 
pose to defend the selfish and oftentimes ruthless 
aggressions of Europeans in the early invasion of 
this continent. The wrong, however, consisted not 
in their coming, but in their treatment of the native 
populations. 

Japanese, defending their case, urge that their im- 
migrants to this land are not inferior to those whom 
we freely admit from south and east Europe. This 
is now readily admitted by most Americans. Many, 
indeed, acknowledge that Japanese immigrants are 
probably superior in intelligence, in diligence, in 
sobriety, in reliability, and in thrift to those who 
come from south and east Europe. 

If this is a fact, is not American refusal to admit 
them in unlimited numbers an expression of race 
selfishness and race prejudice? What reply can 
be made to these arguments of clear-headed Japa- 
nese? The reply would seem to be somewhat as 
follows: 

There are important differences between immi- 
grants from Asia and those from Europe. The vast 
majority of the latter come to America with their 



98 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

wives and children to make permanent homes 
here, surrendering allegiance to their native lands 
and accepting loyalty to this. 

Chiaese and Japanese immigrants, on the con- 
trary, have consisted chiefly thus far of transient 
males. They have come for short periods of work. 
Their scale of Hfe and their industrial and economic 
standards have made them formidable foes to the 
permanent industrial workers of America. This 
has been probably the main reason why the anti- 
Asiatic movement has met with such wide-spread 
indorsement, not only among the working classes, 
but by practically all classes. 

The economic advantage to American employers 
of labor of that large, efficient, and transient Asiatic 
immigration is freely admitted by every one. And 
even now, if Americans could be certain that addi- 
tional Asiatic immigration would be transient, all of 
it returning in a few years to Asia, many would favor 
its generous admission for a while longer because of 
the important work they could do on railroads and 
farms as day-laborers. 

Americans now see, however, that Asiatic immi- 
grants are ceasing to be transients. They are 
settling down for permanency here. 

During the period of free Chinese immigration 
{i. e., up to 1882), although about 300,000 men en- 
tered this land, less than 9,000 women came with 
them. Of the Japanese, however, between 1896 and 



RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NATIONS 99 

1908, when the "gentlemen's agreement" put re- 
straint upon immigration from Japan to 126;835 
men, as many as 20,687 women were admitted. 
But even with this relatively large admission of 
women deplorable sex problems developed, and also 
violent opposition from those white laborers who had 
families to support and desired to do so on the 
American standards of labor and of Hving. When 
free labor immigration ceased from China and 
Japan respectively, whereas the number of Chinese 
women admitted annually dropped off about one- 
haK, that of Japanese women increased many fold. 
Facts and figures with regard to these matters will 
be given in later chapters. 

Although the number of Japanese and Chinese in 
America at present is not large, absolutely, in the 
minds of thoughtful Americans it raises serious ques- 
tions that the Japanese themselves cannot easily 
understand. 

The American people have had and still have a 
problem of the most serious character in the Negro. 
It is not economic. It is wholly racial, having moral, 
political, and social aspects of the gravest character. 
The very foundations of our democracy have been 
violently shaken by this problem. No one knows 
what aggravated forms the Negro problem may yet 
take. It concerns not only questions of poHtical 
and economic justice in the dealings of the white 
and Negro races, but questions of sex relations and 



100 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

of marriage. The tensity of American feeling on 
these matters is due to the facts of slavery and the 
Civil War, both of which have had disastrous effects 
on both races. 

Americans look with grave apprehensions, there- 
fore, on the advent of another great race problem 
through the entrance into our land of yet other 
races so different from us as are Asiatics. Responsi- 
ble Americans clearly recognize that the difficulty 
is due in no small part to Americans themselves. 
Fair and friendly treatment has not thus far been 
given to Asiatics. WUl our people be persuaded to 
give it in the future? This unfair treatment has 
been part cause no doubt of their feelings and atti- 
tude toward us and has promoted the formation of 
their own separate communities. Such separate 
communities, however, accentuate the difficulty of se- 
curing right American treatment . A serious ' ' vicious 
circle" is developing. 

As time goes on will the Japanese and Chinese now 
here become really and thoroughly assimilated to 
American life? Will their children and grandchil- 
dren really lose their race consciousness as Japa- 
nese and Chinese and become genuine Americans? 
This is what has taken place in regard to the vast 
majority of the children and grandchildren of Brit- 
ish, French, Germans, Italians, Scandinavians, and 
Slavs, and of all the other peoples of Europe that 
have come hither. They are, on the whole, so much 



RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NATIONS 101 

alike in appearance that the first generation born 
and reared in America is completely American in 
language, ideas, habits, and appearance. There is 
practically nothing that necessarily and permanently 
characterizes their race origin and sets them off in a 
distinct race group. Race or national conscious- 
ness vanishes and intermarriage takes place, oblit- 
erating still further the slight marks of differentia- 
tion. 

Can this take place with Japanese, Chinese, or 
Hindu populations admitted to this country ? This 
is the question that conscientious and patriotic 
Americans look upon with grave apprehension. If 
from generation to generation there persist definite 
race characteristics of skin and hair and eyes, will 
not race consciousness be also maintained on each 
side ? And in political affairs, will not each distinct 
race group hang together, each working for its own 
interests? 

Some Americans hold the most definite and fixed 
convictions on these matters. Many are filled with 
serious doubts. These convictions, apprehensions, 
and doubts they insist are not the product of race 
arrogance, pride, or prejudice, but rest upon observa- 
tion of the history, past and present, of the ways in 
which race groups actually work. The relations of 
whites and Negroes, of Irish, German, and Hebrew 
groups already formed in certain sections of America, 
illustrate what they hold would happen in regard to 



102 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

other peoples and races were they admitted in large 
numbers. 

Moreover, Japanese in Hawaii and also in Cali- 
fornia they urge have already manifested tendencies 
along these separatist lines. Buddhist priests from 
Japan, confusing religion with patriotism, have 
striven with more or less success to consolidate their 
peoples by schools and temples, and by the obser- 
vance of Japanese festivals, holding them thereby to 
loyalty to Japan. Some Japanese, they point out, 
regard themselves as colonists, as advance-guards in 
the expansion of their peoples, to remain forever 
representatives of their land wherever they may go. 
If these immigrants were to be here but for a few 
years and then to return to their native land, no 
objections could be raised to their maintenance of 
their patriotism. If, however, they expect to stay 
permanently here, their attitude and their plans are 
intolerable. Many Japanese in America already see 
this problem and are doing much to develop in 
members of their race in Hawaii and California a 
spirit of loyalty to America. They work, however, 
with serious obstacles in the way. 

At the close of Chapter II we stated that "if the 
rigid restriction of immigration from Japan and their 
exclusion from the privileges of citizenship are really 
right and necessary, these positions and actions must 
be based on grounds and carried out by methods that 
imply neither race arrogance nor race selfishness." 



RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NATIONS 103 

Are not the above considerations valid grounds 
for establishing the rigid restriction of immigration 
from peoples so diverse from us as are the Japa- 
nese, Chinese, and Hindus ? Decades will be needed 
for us to see whether or not the Japanese population 
now here is going to enter whole-heartedly into our 
life, losing itself as a distinct community and race, 
and become genuinely American, able to co-operate 
efficiently in this great democratic experiment. The 
writer believes that they will do their part suc- 
cessfully. 

For the success, however, of this experiment with 
the Japanese and Chinese already here, Americans 
must of course do their part. We must remove 
those political restrictions that inevitably set them 
off as a special class — I refer to the suffrage. 

Rigid restriction of immigration and at the same time 
full privileges of citizenship to those who are admitted 
to our land, and who duly qualify — these are the 
conditions under which our democratic experiment 
can go forward most favorably in this day of large 
race migrations. Such a policy is not in any degree 
based on race pride or selfishness. It rests on sound 
principles of psychology and sociology. It does 
not ignore Japan's economic problems nor deny 
the brotherhood of the white and yellow races. 
Rather it looks forward to the intercourse of a 
thousand years that He before us in our interna- 
tional and interracial life, and provides for that 



104 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

slow but sound process of mutual acquaintance and 
co-operation that will remove from American minds 
the insidious thought that slanting eyes and a yel- 
lowish skin mean a slippery character and unbridge- 
able race differences. 

A few decades of experience with completely 
Americanized Chinese and Japanese will show us 
that our suspicions are groundless and our fears 
needless. We shall see with our own eyes how 
splendid is the manhood and womanhood of Japa- 
nese and Chinese and other peoples who wiU take 
high rank in our business circles, in our colleges and 
universities, in our churches, and in every walk of 
life. But all this can take place only on the condition 
of rigidly restricted immigration covering many dec- 
ades, and the granting at the same time of a political 
status that gives to such of them as do come to tis a fair 
and favorable chance. 

We are now ready to consider in greater detail 
the policy and the programme advocated in this 
volume. 



CHAPTER VIII 

A POLICY AND A PROGRAMME FOR CONSTRUC- 
TIVE IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION 

For the solution of the many intricate and highly- 
difficult problems connected with our enormous 
immigration from many lands, European and Asi- 
atic, we need a comprehensive policy based on 
correct psychological principles and expressed in a 
programme that includes many specific details. 
This policy and programme should provide for: 

1. The regulation of all immigration on a conmion 
principle. 

2. The specific training of all immigrants for 
citizenship. 

3. The giving of citizenship to all who qualify, 
regardless of race. 

If we are to attain the best results we should have 
a series of bills that deal with all phases of the immi- 
grant question in a systematic, comprehensive, and 
well co-ordinated plan. 

Legislation dealing with these matters should be 
controlled by the following principles: 

1. The United States should so regulate and, 
where necessary, restrict immigration as to provide 
that only so many immigrants may be admitted 

105 



106 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

from any race or people as can be wholesomely 
Americanized. 

2. The number of those who have become Amer- 
icanized from any race or people affords the best 
basis of the measure for the further immigration of 
that people. 

3. American standards of living should be pro- 
tected from the dangerous economic competition of 
immigrants, whether from Europe or from Asia. 

4. Such provisions for the care of aHens residing 
among us should be made as will promote their 
rapid and genuine Americanization and thus main- 
tain intact our democratic institutions and national 
unity. 

5. The federal government should be empowered 
by Congress to protect the lives and property of 
aliens. 

6. All legislation dealing with immigration and 
with resident aliens should be based on justice and 
good-will as well as on economic and political con- 
siderations. 

Important Specifications 

1. Regulation of the Rate of Immigration. — The 
maximum permissible annual immigration from any 
people should be a definite per cent (say 5) of those 
from that people who have already become natural- 
ized citizens together with all American-born children 
of immigrants of that people. 



IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION 107 

2. A Federal Bureau for the Registration of Aliens. — 
A federal bureau for the registration of aliens should 
be estabHshed and all resident aliens should be re- 
quired to register and to keep registered until 
they have qualified to become American citizens. 
A registration fee ($10 or perhaps, $5 a year) might 
well be required of all male aliens eighteen years of 
age or over. 

3. The Federal Distribution Bureau. — The Federal 
Bureau for the Distribution of Immigrants should be 
developed and provided with increased funds for 
larger and more effective methods. 

4. A Federal Bureau for the Education of Aliens. — 
A federal bureau for the education of aliens for 
American citizenship should be established. While 
this bureau should not set up its own schools, its 
duty should be to promote the establishment by 
local bodies of suitable schools in needful localities 
and all registered ahens should be given education 
for citizenship free of cost. The bureau should be 
provided with funds for subsidies to be granted to 
schools upon the fulfilment of conditions prescribed 
by the bureau. The registration fee of aliens might 
well be reduced by one dollar ($1) for every exam- 
ination passed. 

5. Congressional Legislation for the Adequate Pro- 
tection of Aliens. — Congress should at once enact a 
law enabling the federal government to exercise 
immediate jurisdiction in any case involving the 



108 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

protection of and justice to aliens. The treaties 
place this responsibility on the federal government 
but no laws as yet give it this power. The bill 
drafted by Honorable William H. Taft and indorsed 
by the American Bar Association, or some similar 
bill, should be passed. 

6. Amendment of Naturalization Laws. — The 
standards of naturalization should be raised. Only 
those applicants for naturalization should be re- 
garded as qualified who have passed all the examina- 
tions of the schools for citizenship and who have 
maintained their registration without break from 
the time of their admittance to America. Under 
the above conditions and limitations, citizenship 
should be given to all who qualify. 

Such are the main outlines of the proposed con- 
structive policy and programme for the solution of 
the entire immigration problem, Asiatic as well as 
European. For a more adequate understanding, 
however, of this general proposal and in order to 
remove certain possible misapprehensions and to 
indicate how certain administrative difliculties may 
be met we should consider: 

A Few Additional Details. — (a) The schedule for 
maximum immigration is to be based for each dec- 
ade on figures secured from the census. As a rule no 
change should be made in the schedule between the 
census periods. With each new census a new sched- 



IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION 109 

ule should be prepared, but it should not go into op- 
eration automatically. Congress should reconsider 
the whole matter once in ten years upon receiving 
the figures based upon the new census, and decide 
either to adopt the new schedule or some new per- 
centage rate, or possibly to continue the same sched- 
ule for another decade. This plan does not contem- 
plate automatic, geometrical increase of immigration, 
either annual or decennial. 

(5) Provision should be made for certain excepted 
classes. Government officials, travellers, and stu- 
dents would, of course, be admitted outside of the 
fixed schedule figures. Ahens who have already 
resided in America and taken out their first papers, 
or who have passed all the required examinations, 
should also doubtless be admitted freely, regardless 
of the schedule. Women, and children under four- 
teen years of age, might also be included among the 
excepted classes. If thought important, unmarried 
women twenty-one years of age and over might be 
subject to the percentage rate. By providing for 
such exceptions the drastic features of the proposed 
plan would be largely, perhaps wholly, relieved. 

(c) Provision should be made if possible to pre- 
vent the congestion of a particular people in a single 
locality. Plans for real distribution should be care- 
fully worked out. 

(d) Should the restriction required by the five-per- 
cent plan be regarded as excessively severe, the per- 



no DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

cent rate could be advanced. In any case it seems 
desirable that the five-per-cent restriction should be 
applied only to males fourteen years of age and over, 
and to immarried women twenty-one of years age 
and over. 

(e) In order that individuals from peoples having 
no citizens in the United States may not be absolutely 
excluded, provision might be made for a minimum 
permissible annual immigration of, say, 500; or possi- 
bly 1,000 might be allowed, regardless of the per- 
centage rate. 

. (/) Registration, with pajmient of the fee, might 
well be required only of male aliens eighteen years of 
age and over. Since, however, it is highly desir- 
able that immigrant women also should learn the 
English language, provision might be made that all 
alien women should register without payment of the 
fee and be given the privileges of education and of 
taking the examinations free of cost. This privilege 
might extend over a period of five years. After pass- 
ing the examinations there should be no further re- 
quirement for registration. If, however, after five 
years the examinations have not been passed, then 
they might well be required to pay a registration tax 
of $6 annually, a reduction of $1 being allowed for 
every examination passed. 

(g) In order to meet special cases and exigencies, 
such as religious or political persecutions, war, 
famine, or flood, provision might well be made to 



IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION 111 

give special power to the Commissioner of Immi- 
gration in consultation with the Commissioner of 
Labor and one or two other specified high officials 
to order exceptional treatment. 

Qi) The proposed policy, if enacted into law, 
would put into the hands of Congress a flexible instru- 
ment for the continuous and exact regulation of im- 
migration, adapting it from time to time to the eco- 
nomic conditions of the country. Is it not important 
for Congress to take complete and exact control of 
the situation while the present lull is on and be 
able to determine what the maximum immigration 
shall be before we find ourselves overwhelmed with 
its magnitude? If the post-bellum immigration 
should prove to be small, a law limiting it to figures 
proposed by this plan would not restrict it. 

(i) An objection to the proposed plan is raised by 
some. It is urged that tens of thousands would suf- 
fer the hardship of deportation because of arrival 
after the maximum limit has been reached. Such a 
situation, however, could easily be avoided by a 
little care in the matter of administration. Pro- 
vision could be made, for instance, that each of the 
transportation lines bringing immigrants from any 
particular land should agree with the immigration 
office upon the maximum number of immigrants 
that it may bring to America during the year, the 
sum total of these agreements being equal to maxi- 
mum permissible immigration from that particular 



112 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

land. There would then be no danger of deporta- 
tion because of excessive immigration. The steam- 
ship lines, moreover, would see to it that their 
immigration accommodation would be continuously- 
occupied throughout the year, avoiding thus a 
rush during the first two or three months of the 
year. 

(y) A second objection is raised by some, namely, 
the difficulty of selecting the favored ones in those 
countries where the restriction would be severe. 
This difficulty, however, would be completely ob- 
viated by the steamship companies themselves. 
Immigrants would secure passage in the order of 
their purchase of tickets; first come, first served. 

(k) In order to alleviate hardship as far as possi- 
ble, might not immigration inspection offices be es- 
tablished in the principal ports of departure, and pro- 
vision be made that all immigration from specified 
regions should receive inspection at those offices 
alone, such inspection to be final ? 

(0 The most searching criticism of the policy and 
programme here proposed deals with the percentage 
principle itself. It is said by critics to be mechan- 
ical and therefore artificial. Moreover, while it 
professes to be free from race discrimination, it 
nevertheless is in fact strongly discriminating, for 
it seizes for example upon the accident of a small 
Japanese and Chinese American-born citizenship to 
enforce an exceedingly rigid restriction of immigrants 



IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION 113 

from those lands while it permits tens and even hun- 
dreds of thousands to come from European lands, 
merely because their large immigration took place 
decades ago. The plan, therefore, they urge, can- 
not be satisfactory to Japan. 

These Criticisms Overlook Certain Facts. — ^The 
plan takes Americanization as its foundation prin- 
ciple of restriction. Let the critic face this question. 
Is it, or is it not, true that Americanization of new- 
comers from any particular land depends in some 
close way upon the degree of Americanization of those 
from that land who are already here? Does a new 
Italian or Japanese immigrant become an American 
in spirit and in language equally easily and whole- 
somely whether the Italian or Japanese group with 
which he is in daily contact is well Americanized, or 
hardly Americanized at all? Whether they speak 
and read English easily and are voting citizens, or 
whether they speak English only smatteringly, read 
only their own foreign-language papers, and have 
no voting power or political interests? If the new- 
comers become Americanized equally easily and 
rapidly under either set of conditions, then the per- 
centage principle of limitation is artificial and 
mechanical; otherwise it is sociological and psycho- 
logical. The writer holds that the restricting of 
newcomers from any people to some small percent- 
age of those of that people who have already become 
American citizens is a fundamental psychological 



114 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

and sociological principle, and that the proposal 
therefore is neither mechanical nor artificial. 

The admission of larger numbers than can be 
easily Americanized creates and maintains difficul- 
ties of many kinds — economic, political, and racial. 
The welfare of the immigrants themselves and of the 
American people and the abiding success of our 
democratic institutions depend upon the proper 
and rapid Americanization of all who settle perma- 
nently in our land. 

Another fact to be kept in mind is that we must 
start with the present actual situation. We cannot 
ignore or go back on history. We can no more rec- 
tify the inequalities of past immigration — ^Japanese 
or Italian as compared with English, German, and 
Scandinavian — ^than we can rectify the accident of 
an unfortunate grandfather. We must start our n£w 
policy and programme with the situation as it is to- 
day. We should insist that immigration from any 
land shall not be larger than that which we can 
Americanize. This requires the admission of immi- 
grants from different lands in different numbers, hut 
upon the same principle. This is not "race discrim- 
ination" in the usual sense, and in the sense to which 
Japan raises objection. 

The assertion that Japanese will resent this pro- 
posal is an assumption based on ignorance. Such 
a critic fails to understand the essence of Japan's 
criticism of our present policies. Japan is not de- 



IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION 115 

manding opportunity for free immigration. But 
she does earnestly ask for removal of the humiliation 
of differential treatment on the mere ground of race. 

As a matter of fact, Japanese who understand the 
foregoing proposals do not resent them. If all 
immigration to America is restricted on the same 
principle, that which they resent is removed, and 
they are satisfied. Baron Kato, former minister 
of foreign affairs, at a dinner of welcome (February 
10, 1915) to Professor Shailer Mathews and the 
writer, who went to Japan as the Christian Embassy 
of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in 
America to the churches of Japan, said: "We 
would not mind disabilities if they were equally 
applicable to all nations. . . . Questions like this 
require time to settle. ... At the same time we 
cannot rest satisfied until this question is finally and 
properly settled." 

It may not be amiss to note that as the decades 
pass, if those admitted from any specified land and 
their children chose to become American citizens, 
the permissible immigration from that particular 
land will naturally increase decade by decade. The 
newcomers, however, being always kept at a small 
percentage of those already Americanized, the ob- 
jections to and dangers from increasing immigration 
from that land will be held at a minimum. 

Would not the above proposals for a constructive 
immigration policy and programme co-ordinate. 



116 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

systematize, and rationalize our entire procedure in 
dealing with immigration, and solve in a fundamental 
way its most perplexing difficulties ? Such a policy 
would protect American labor from danger of sud- 
den and excessive immigration from any land. It 
would promote the wholesome and rapid assimila- 
tion of all newcomers. It would regulate the rate 
of the coming of immigrants from any land by the 
proven capacity for Americanization of those from 
that land already here. It would keep the new- 
comers of each people always a minority of its Amer- 
icanized citizens. It would be free from every trace 
of differential race treatment. Our relations with 
Japan and China would thus be right. 

Such a policy, therefore, giving to every people the 
"most favored nation treatment, ' ' would maintain and 
deepen our international friendship on every side. 

Criticism of and suggestions for improving this 
plan are invited. 

Before making up his mind as to the actual prac- 
ticability of the policy and programme described 
above, the student will inevitably inquire as to its 
statistical results. Whether the five-per-cent rate is 
desirable will depend upon the actual immigration 
which it would allow. We therefore add as an appen- 
dix to this chapter tables and explanations showing 
just how a five-per-cent immigration law would have 
affected immigration had it been in force dm'ing the 
five years between 1911 and 1915. 



IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION 



117 



APPENDIX TO CHAPTER VIII 



TABLES SHOWING HOW THE FIVE PER CENT RESTRIC- 
TION PROPOSAL WOULD HAVE AFFECTED IMMI- 
GRATION FROM JAPAN, CHINA, AND ITALY FOR 
EACH OF THE FIVE YEARS INDICATED 





TABLE 


[ 




TABLE II 




Aliens Actually Admitted for the 


The Proposed 




Years Indicated; cf 


Annual Re- 


Five-Per-Cent 




ports of Immigration Bureau 




Standard 


1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


6 


7 












Maxi- 
















mum 
















Per- 
















missi- 


Males 














ble 


who 










"Women 


Men 


Annual 


would 








Chil- 


14 


14 


Immi- 


have 




Non- 




dren 


years 


years 


gration 


been 




immi- 


Immi- 


under 


and 


and 


of 


ex- 




grants 


grants 


14 


over 


over 


Males 


cluded 


JAPANESE : 
















1911 


1,915 


4,575 


300 


3,011 


1,264 


1,220 


44 


1912 


2,574 


6,172 


328 


4,123 


1,721 


1,220 


501 


1913 


3,370 


8,302 


437 


4,988 


2,877 


1,220 


1.657 


1914 


4,075 


8,941 


438 


5,502 


3,001 


1,220 


1,781 


1915 


3,628 


8,609 


487 


4,693 


3,429 


1,220 


2,209 


15,562 


36,599 


1,990 


22,317 


12,292 


6,100 


6,192 


CHINESE: 
















1911 


4,350 


1,307 


112 


165 


1,030 


1,106 


.... 


1912 


3,883 


1,608 


207 


201 


1,200 


1,106 


94 


1913 


1,465 


2,022 


189 


303 


1,530 


1,106 


424 


1914 


1,218 


2,354 


144 


276 


1,934 


1,106 


828 


1915 


1,174 


2,469 


118 


267 


2,084 


1,106 


978 


12,090 


9,760 


770 


1,212 


7,778 


5,530 


2,324 


ITALIANS: 
















1911 


23,410 


189,950 


24,071 


39,761 


126,118 


45.768 


80,350 


1912 


27,650 


162,273 


23,114 


38,262 


100,867 


45,768 


55,099 


1913 


44,372 


274,147 


31,550 


60,263 


192,334 


45,768 


146,566 


1914 


27,320 


296,414 


37,711 


60,695 


198,008 


45,768 


152,240 


1915 


9,452 


57,217 


13,272 


19,589 


24,356 


45,768 




132,204 


980,001 129,718 


208,600 


641,683 


228,840 


434,255 



118 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 



K 
P 

o 

o ^ 

HW 
I— I 

[V] H 



go 

o 

w 

CO 

1-^ 





i-o 




Annual 

Average 

of Males 

who would 

have been 

excluded 




















> 




tN 


MM • 05 • i-< 


















l-l 


-s^ 




^ ■ 






o a 










imum 
issible 
al Im- 
ation 
ales § 


05 ■* ■* rH . CO O 


to 10 00 lO rH 


H 


<0 


O ■* OS O ■ o 05 

(M ■* 05 co_ : rt lo 


>0 Tj( M M 00 
05 t» t^ 10 
IN l^"l0"t^M 




,a ® 




^l§|^ 


to" "2. • iH 




hdi 




tH ■*— 


rH (N ■* CO 








Sl^i-s 




rH CO 










(M O t» rH ffl 10 lO 


t^ M •* 50 Ti t^ CO 






Cq M t^ O rH lO <o 


M CO rH ■<)( 05 IN IN 




1-5 c3 


»fi 


iioi 


<q C^_ 50 iq O iq O 
m" ■*" m" 00 t-" rH fq 


rH IN 05_ 05 M_ t^ 

m" to" m" •*" 00" 05 




fS" 




1-i 


IN IN 




el » 














fl m t! 








£ffl 




■* OOO to M0050 


10 CO CO CO ■* 








Male 
imigra: 
4 year; 
nd ove 


i-H 00 00 O 00 l> IN 


00 >-< l> M "5 M M 




® S 




rH rH M 10 O I> M 


rH 00 t^_ 05 to CO 




!>.o 


■* 


00 rH OO" <N lO" t>." O 


10" 0" T^ 05" ■*" rH 00 








rH IN rH ■* 00 rH 


rH M rH IN Tjt •Ijt 


M 
l-l 


51 












male 
grants 
years 
over 


IM to 05 W 00 IN t^ 


05 M t' 10 M 10 r-1 






■* Tjl O) t^ 00 rH 05 


CO OiMCOlN NOO 


S 


^•3 


f5 


O M_ rH 00 O IN 1^ 
M M ^ M 05 rH ^ 


rH 00 00 ■* >0_ 
Ci 10" rH to" 0" OT 


"E a, 




s a ■« 


rH rH Ol 


rH OSrHMO 


n 


3 -iS 




^g-Hg 




rH 


<t) 


•^o 








H 


•M OS 




1— 1 










rH ■"^ IN to M O 05 


CO lO 'It* N M 00 OS 




■grs 




e« 


IN 00 M lO l> to O 


TJI •* M t^ 10 CO t* 




a ts 


N 


I 


IN M M lO O r^ rH 

■* to O 00 lO os' b- 


q iq rH 00 ■* 0^ N 

00" 00" rH in" 10" O" CO 






H 


M IN ■* ■* <N rH 


F-l IC 10 'l' 00 rH 




n 






rH 


C4 CO 




.S"^ 




g 












hH 








to 








•t; i-H 




■M 












.§ 


M CO 05 rH 00 O >0 


OCO coot- 100 






t^ 00 00 O M 05 to 


IN IN CD 05 00 OS IN 




1H 


^1 


rH t>. to M 03 O 10 

to" in" to" t»" in" w 


05 •^1<_ IN 05_ M >q 05 
to" to to" 1>" 05 






1-i _ rH rH 


rH CO <N (» 




<C<5i-l 








r^ 






M 
















. .73 • • 




■o 


























• • • • 




d 


























; • c3 ; ; 




i;« 


























• c3 ' d 


























1 




: § a* : "g 




i 




















t 
% 


< 
) 




:o.2 -1 




•i 

c 


•a 
. 00 

j-g 
















4 






P9.2 5 




































C 


i 
> 

1 


Mean (bla 
rmenian. . 
ohemian a 
ulgarian, 
Monteneg 
roatian an 


1 


almatian, 
Herzegovi 
utch and '. 
ast Indian 

ncrlish 








1 






pi 


i 


ri ciei'^ L5 to i> 


Q QHWfefc40 

00 03 6 -< IN P? •* 












r-i 1^ w^ r^ f^ 



IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION 



119 



05 00 
U5 00 

CO© 



* C3 CO 00 03 05 

• 00 t> 00 05 00 
: t» >H CO !0 CO 



• 00 ■* 05 ■* o 

• CO ■* rH 05 I> 

: 05_ CO t» 00 N 

• eo>o Ni-H 



to N 1-1 00 


. o 


QOOO 

S CO-* 


00 ■* OS <© 


• (N 


00 CO •* t» 


:'H* 


W* «5 


t^ rH U5 


• >-i 


TjfiOOO 


CO O J* 







NOOtOCOCOiOtOi-itOOOTiHOOOO 

'-iooN.oiri05t»cooc<iT)<iooo 

N 1> « (N ffl 0_ l^_ 00_ 05 IH 00 rH 

05 CO N* C<f 00* to N 

■Tjt O CO rH 




05 t^TcO O !>• N 

N CO fH IN O 



05NOIN-HIN05O!0C<IO0005OC0lM'-ll005-»l<t~-'H(NO 
»00(M00005l050'-IU5(NOO<NrHCDOt^'*>OC005N.CO 
00Tt<(N>O-H(NrHt^COt>. OOOCOU5C^t>C<100lNC<l®«(N 



eocoiHOji-it-i«e<)ift05>HTjtTj<tDiocococoiO'-('*'*oifl 

C00005T-IOOrHO'*t-»t>.lHOt>.COlOOOl^OOOOOCO'Ht>.TH 
OOOTjlCO!NCOIM'*_05rH 'O'^*.'^'!'''. ®M05t-iHC0e>1 

lOOiocoKSN odoo rHNodfflt^oo'r-^cofOiHod co 

iH U5 t' CO t^ N N •* iM W >-l rt CO >0 CO CO 



05«ON'-l005COT)ft-.iHCO(OiHiHt»N.COOO>fl050505lOU5 



00 t» 00 ■* in to 

50 CO CO "5 (N CO 

iH Tjl iH 1-1 00 



50 1> CO N_ o in 
o t> 05 to CO in 

i-l rt Tf CO 05 i-t 



F^ ^ r-< tH tH tH 1 



CO 00 M* CO l> O t>. r-l CO ^ fH OO (N 05 •* IN 



•*■* 
1-H in 

00 05 
IN CO 



CO-* 

1-1 1^ 

(N 1-1 



CO 00 

CD IN 
CO w 



05 35 

N o 
coo 
eo"N 




;:; o 



o 



m 



120 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

The foregoing statistical tables give the actual immigra- 
tion of the five years ending June 30, 1915, so classified as 
to show what the effect upon that immigration would have 
been if the proposed five-per-cent standard for its limitation 
had been in force. The basal figures here given have been 
especially prepared for the writer by the statistician of the 
United States Bureau of Immigration. 

In classifying aliens the Immigration Bureau distinguishes 
between immigrants (who come for permanent residence 
here) and non-immigrants (who come for a transient stay). 
The five-per-cent restriction proposal as worked out in these 
statistics does not limit the entering of non-immigrants, of 
children, or of women. It affects only males fourteen years 
of age and over. 

Column 6 gives the standards for the maximum permissible 
annual immigration of males from the various races and 
peoples according to the five-per-cent restriction policy ad- 
vocated in this volume. This column is derived from the 
census of 1910; the figure for each people is five per cent of 
the American-born children of foreign parents of that people 
plus the number of those from that same people who have 
become naturalized citizens. This last item (the naturalized 
citizens) was secured "by mathematical calculations based 
upon Tables XIII and XXXIII, pp. 975 and 1082, vol. I, 
of the Census Population Report for 1910." Subtracting 
the figures of column 6 from those of column 5 (the average 
annual number of males actually admitted) we secure 
column 7, showing the annual average number of mules who 
would have been excluded had the five-per-cent limitation 
principle been in force. 

The number of immigrant children admitted during 
the five years ending June 30, 1915, may be secured by 
subtracting the sum of the figures given in Table I, 
columns 3 and 4, from the corresponding figures given in 
column 2. 

In order to show in more detail the working of the five- 



IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION 121 

per-cent limitation plan. Tables III and IV have been added, 
dealing with Japan, China, and Italy for each year from 1911 
to 1915. 

Points to Notice 

1. The proposals of this chapter would have imposed more 
rigid restriction not only upon Japanese but also upon Chi- 
nese than is imposed by the present laws and arrangements. 

2. The restriction upon Italians is particularly striking. 
But note the large disparity between Italian male and 
female immigrants (Table III, columns 4 and 5). 

3. The plan here proposed if in force would have Imposed 
no restriction upon Hebrew immigration. 

4. The average immigration from Europe for the past 
five years was, of course, seriously disturbed by the striking 
decrease for 1915 because of the war. Allowance must be 
made for this factor, 

5. The restriction of the immigration of men will, of course, 
sooner or later affect that of women and children, 

6. In column 6 the figure 1,000 should be substituted in 
each place where the five-per-cent rate would allow an im- 
migration less than this amount, in harmony with the pro- 
posal of paragraph (e), page 110. 

7. The total annual average immigration of males from 
those countries whose actual immigration was less than their 
permissible maximum amounted to about 170,000, while the 
total permissible annual immigration of males from those 
countries that exceeded their permissible maximum amounted 
to about 136,000. If the immigration of the past five years 
had been regulated by the policy set forth in this pamphlet, 
the average immigration of males from all countries would 
have been about 324,000 annually, instead of the average of 
518,000 that actually were admitted. 



CHAPTER IX 
CRITICISMS CRITICISED 

When the writer appeared, early in 1914, before 
the Senate Committee on Immigration and made the 
statement that the American-Japanese problem 
was but one phase of a much larger American- 
Asiatic problem, and that in meeting this whole 
problem it would be necessary ultimately to rescind 
the present Chinese legislation and to substitute 
therefor legislation more in harmony with the 
fundamental principles of our government and of 
good-neighborliness with Asia, one of the senators 
interrupted the address with the remark: "Mr. 
Gulick, you may as well save your breath and our 
time. America has made up its mind as to what it 
is going to do with the Asiatic, and there is not a 
particle of use in your attempting to budge it." 

This remark was made without waiting to hear 
what substitute legislation would be more in har- 
mony with good-neighborliness and the fundamental 
principles of our government. And so it usually 
is. The moment a proposal is made to deal with 
Asiatics on the basis of equality with the treatment 
accorded to other peoples, many immediately jump 
to the conclusion that free immigration and the com- 
plete inundation of America by Asiatics is the object 

122 



CRITICISMS CRITICISED 123 

of the proposal. The critic begins at once to de- 
pict the millions that would come to us, their crowd- 
ing into all sorts of occupations, their long hours of 
work, their low and degraded scale of life, and their 
impossible wages. 

The ultimate consequences are pictured in lurid 
colors. Asiatics, they insist, could not possibly take 
real part in maintaining a democracy, for they be- 
lieve in despotism, not only in the government, but 
also in the family; democratic principles are in- 
trinsically unacceptable to them and even unintelli- 
gible. Those who present these assertions commonly 
claim that an unbridgeable chasm separates the 
Caucasian from the Asiatic mind. They glibly 
quote the lines from Eapling: 

"Oh, East is East and West is West, 
And never the twain shall meet. 
Till earth and sky stand presently 
At God's great judgment seat." 

The proposals of this volume, however, as has al- 
ready been made clear, not only do not provide for 
free immigration of Asiatics to the United States, 
but rather, on the contrary, provide for very rigid 
restriction of such immigration. The proposed re- 
striction is identical in principle with that which 
the writer contends should be applied to every peo- 
ple, thus providing for the fulfilment of our treaty 
pledges to "give most favored nation treatment"; 



124 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

but the number of Asiatics that woiild be admitted 
for the present and for several decades to come 
would be very small, indeed, especiall}- when com- 
pared with those admissible from the principal peo- 
ples of Europe. The numbers admissible from Asia, 
as also from every land, would each year be only a 
small per cent of those from their respective peoples 
who had already become American citizens. In con- 
sequence of this provision, the newcomers from any 
people would always be only a small minority of 
those who have become Americanized. The dan- 
gers, therefore, instinctively feared from the presence 
of large alien or un-Americanized people in our 
midst would be reduced to a minimum. 

Let it be clearly understood, then, that the pro- 
posals of this volume have nothing to do with free 
Asiatic immigration. What we do urge with all pos- 
sible emphasis is that those whom we do admit, 
and who are to stay here permanently, whatever 
their race may be, should be urged and helped to 
learn our language and our ways and to enter thus into 
wholesome relations with our government and our people. 

That, however, which causes deepest solicitude 
on the part of many when this Asiatic problem is 
brought forward is the intermarriage of Americans 
and Asiatics. 

The problems raised by such intermarriages are 
so important that they should be made, we contend, 
the subject of scientific investigation. A competent 



CRITICISMS CRITICISED 125 

commission of experts in biology, ethnology, psy- 
chology, sociology, and morals should speedily be 
appointed to study the whole question with the ut- 
most thoroughness. 

But the granting of privileges of citizenship to all 
who qualify, regardless of race, has no relation whatever 
to the intermarriage of the races. This remains ex- 
actly the same whether citizenship is granted or is 
not granted. 

An Asiatic who has secured American citizenship 
does not on that account have the right to compel 
a woman to marry him. His ability in winning 
her affection, moreover, does not depend in any 
degree whatever upon his possession of citizenship, 
nor does his lack of citizenship make him less able 
in presenting his charms or in winning her affection. 
The man's capacity in these matters depends upon 
his personal traits, not upon his political status. 
The question of intermarriage remains the same, 
therefore, whether we grant citizenship or withhold 
it. 

The probability of intermarriage between Asi- 
atics and whites is slight in the case of alien men 
and American women. The intermarriage of Amer- 
ican-born and American-educated children of Asi- 
atics of either sex with Americans of long American 
ancestry of the opposite sex is, however, not im- 
probable. But this probability is not in any way 
lessened or increased by withholding or by giv- 



126 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

ing privileges of citizenship to aliens who qualify. 
There is no relation whatsoever between these two 
things. American-born children are citizens, what- 
ever their race. The withholding of citizenship 
from Asiatic parents will not have the slightest 
effect upon the chance that their American-born 
boys and girls may intermarry with girls and boys 
of long American ancestry, if they are mutually 
attractive. 

The objection, therefore, to giving citizenship to 
all who qualify, regardless of race, on the ground 
that it will break down the barriers to race inter- 
marriage, is absolutely illogical, due to an amazing 
confusion of thought. 

The argument that a people, like a family, has a 
right to maintain the privacy of its home, also misses 
the point. It has nothing whatever to do with the 
policy urged in this volume. The real question is, 
what shall we do with those whom we have already 
admitted to our home? 

If we grant various privileges to Europeans of 
Asiatic extraction, to Hungarians and Finns, to 
almost pure Tartars classed as Slavs, to Turks, 
Syrians, to Hottentots, Zulus, KaflSrs, and to all 
the races of Africa, of Mexico, and of South America, 
is it not somewhat arbitrary to say to Chinese and 
Japanese whom we have admitted that we will not 
give them the same privileges, no matter how well 
they may personally qualify for them ? 



CRITICISMS CRITICISED 127 

This objection in reality concerns the question of 
immigration and not at all that of citizenship or of 
intermarriage. We insist with all possible emphasis 
that the proposal to grant citizenship has nothing 
whatever to do with it. We hold that so far as 
America does admit aliens to our national home we 
should treat them aU alike, as our guests and friends. 

The argument that we have one great and insolu- 
ble race problem on our hands already and that, 
therefore, we should avoid taking on another, is 
also entirely aside from the point. The question is 
not whether we are going to let Japanese and Chi- 
nese into our land, but whether we are going to give 
the square and friendly deal to those whom we have 
admitted and will continue to admit. 

The argument in question ignores the only method 
that can possibly solve the race problem which is 
already upon us. 

First, we mu^t give complete political equality to 
qualified men of every race who are here and here to 
stay. 

Second, we must provide that men of every race 
who vote shall conform to the established standard 
of qualifications for citizenship. 

All candidates for the suffrage, whether foreign- 
born or native-born, white or Negro, Mexican or 
Persian, Armenian, Turkish, Chinese, or Japanese, 
should be required to qualify on the basis of fairly 
high standards. The ignorant should, of course, 



128 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

not have the suffrage, whether that ignorance be 
ignorance of the EngHsh language or of the funda- 
mental principles and practices, history and ideals of 
our government. If such standards are required 
of all who seek the suffrage, no Asiatic race question 
will develop. 

The giving of citizenship privileges to all who qualify 
will not only not produce a second race question hut 
it is the one all-essential method for preventing its 
rise. 

If, as some critics of these proposals seem to de- 
sire, we continue to deal with the Asiatic question 
as it now stands, by methods of arbitrary political 
and racial discrimination and of economic disad- 
vantage, an increasingly difficult Asiatic problem 
cannot fail to develop. In fact, by the very laws 
of human psychology, the methods they propose 
would make certain the very difficulties they wish to 
avoid. 

The alleged unbridgeable chasm between the East 
and the West is in fact non-existent. The minds 
and hearts of men are essentially the same, what- 
ever the race. In spite of all their admitted differ- 
ences, the East and the West have far more in 
common than appears to the casual traveller and 
the superficial student. Those who quote Kipling 
are hardly fair to him when they stop with the hnes 
that correspond to their a priori opinions and fail 
to quote the lines which controvert them. Im- 



CRITICISMS CRITICISED 129 

mediately following the four lines quoted above, 
Kipling adds: 

" But there is neither East nor West, 
Border nor Breed nor Birth, 
When two strong men stand face to face, 

Though they come from the ends of the Earth." 



PART II 
STATISTICAL 



SOME DEFINITIONS 

The preceding nine chapters have been limited 
to the discussion of the poHtical facts and consider- 
ations bearing upon the needed new pohcy for deal- 
ing with our Oriental populations. Careful students 
of these questions, however, will desire to know with 
some detail all available facts. The following chap- 
ters present with as much condensation as possible a 
large amount of statistical information. It is based 
on a careful compilation of statistics published by 
the government in regard to Chinese and Japanese. 
The writer had hoped to publish his compilations 
as an Appendix to this volume. He has been com- 
pelled, however, to satisfy himself with the sum- 
maries here presented. 

In order that the reader may be able thoroughly 
to appreciate the statistics presented in these chap- 
ters, let him keep in mind the following important 
definitions and distinctions. 

1. "Immigrants" are those who enter the United 
States expecting to remain permanently, while 
"non-immigrants" are those who enter with the ex- 
pectation of remaining only temporarily. 

2. "Emigrants" are those who leave with no ex- 
pectation of returning, while those who leave for 

133 



134 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

only a temporary absence are termed "non-emi- 
grants." 

It must not be assumed that those who enter as 
"immigrants" leave as "emigrants." The natural 
expectations would in fact be that those who enter 
as immigrants, if they leave would do so as non- 
emigrants while those who enter as "non-immi- 
grants" would leave as "emigrants." But, as a 
matter of fact, even this is not a safe assumption, 
for many who come for only a transient stay, leave 
only for a temporary absence. There is, in truth, 
no relation whatever between immigrants and emi- 
grants, non-immigrants and non-emigrants. 

3. Close attention must be given to the distinc- 
tion between race and coimtry. Not every immi- 
grant who comes from Germany is a German, nor 
from Japan a Japanese. The statistics of these 
chapters deal in every case with Japanese and Chi- 
nese by race. This fact must be carefully watched 
by those who attempt to verify the figures here 
given, by comparing them with the government 
reports. 

4. The tables on which we base our statements 
have been compiled from the successive reports of 
the Immigration Bureau. Those reports for the ear- 
lier periods are exceedingly meagre. As the decades 
have passed, attention has been given to new points 
and fresh classifications have been adopted. Each 
table here presented begins with the date when the 



SOME DEFINITIONS 135 

classification went into effect. Statistics concerning 
immigrants are far more complete than those con- 
cerning non-immigrantS; and of emigrants than of 
non-emigrants, strange to say. 

In view of the above facts the reader is requested 
to note with care the exact title of each table. 

5. Chinese exclusion laws went into effect in 1882. 
Since their full effect was not at once operative, how- 
ever, Chinese immigration is divided into two peri- 
ods, the first period ending with 1883 and the second 
beginning with 1884. 

6. Similarly with regard to the Japanese. The 
"gentlemen's agreement" though entered upon in 
December, 1907, first disclosed its full effect in the 
year ending June 30, 1909; this is accordingly the 
beginning of the new period of Japanese immigra- 
tion, while 1908 marks the end of the old period. 

7. The Hawaiian Islands became a part of the 
United States in 1898. The census of 1900 distin- 
guished between Hawaii and Continental United 
States. The statistics of the Bureau of Immigra- 
tion until 1899 exclude the Hawaiian Islands, and 
beginning with 1900 include those islands. This fact 
introduces an element of confusion, unless the stu- 
dent is on a sharp lookout. 

In reading the following chapters let us remember 
that the United States include Hawaii. All tables, 
therefore, which give statistics for the "United 
States" of course include the figures from the Terri- 



136 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

tory of Hawaii, just as they do those from the State 
of New York. When the two are to be distinguished 
and treated separately the terms used are "Conti- 
nental United States" and "Hawaii." 



CHAPTER X 
CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 

Few Americans realize that we have a permanent 
Oriental population in om* midst. It is nevertheless 
a fact. And it is a fact of much importance. For 
if we are going to avoid " another iace problem," it 
is of the highest importance that we know the exact 
facts in regard to this population and that we adopt 
suitable poHcies in dealing with it. 

Although Chinese and Japanese are both Oriental, 
their differences are so important that they should 
be dealt with separately. We confine our study in 
this chapter to the Chinese. 

The first year of considerable Chinese immigra- 
tion was 1854 when 13,100 persons were admitted 
from China. The preceding year only 42 had ar- 
rived, and previous to 1853 only 46 Chinese all told 
are reported as having come to the United States. 
From 1854 until 1883, when the law regulating Chi- 
nese labor immigration became effective, the ar- 
rivals varied year by year from 3,000 or 4,000 to 
nearly 40,000 in 1882. 

Previous to 1857, the statistics are not given by 
race. If, however, we assume that all who came as 

137 



138 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

immigrants from China prior to that date were 
Chinese we get the following results: 

Before 1853 46 

1853-1883 290,342 

1884-1916 (immigrants) 57,060 

1884-1916 (non-immigrants) 45,805» 

Total 393,253 

The records of departures from the United States 
are far less complete than those of arrivals. Until 
1883 only departures from San Francisco are avail- 
able. Records of departures from the entire coun- 
try begin in 1884, but strange to say the figures for 
the years 1896 to 1907 seem not to have been com- 
piled. The total departures from San Francisco 
from 1857 to 1883 amounted to 146,751, while those 
from the entire country from 1884 to 1916 (twelve 
years lacking) amounted to 154,135. If we make 
the altogether probable assumption that the average 
for those twelve years was 4,000 annually, the de- 
partures for the period since Chinese exclusion 
went into effect would amount to about 190,000, 
making a total departure since 1857 of about 336,000. 
If the total arrivals amounted to some 395,000 and 
the total departures to 336,000, the Chinese in the 
United States in 1916 should be about 60,000. 
This calculation, however, makes no allowance for 
deaths or births, nor for departures from other ports 

1 Of this smn, 6,000 are estimated for the ten years, 1896-1905, for 
which statistics are lacking. 



CHART SHOWING INCREASE AND DECREASE OF 
CHINESE AND JAPANESE ADMITTED TO THE UNITED STATES 





1850 


1855 


1860 


1865 


1870 


1875 


1880 


1885 


1890 


1895 1900 


905 1910 


1915 


40,000 


























39,000 
38,000 
37,000 
36,000 
























































































,, 












35,000 














? 












34,000 
33,000 
32,000 
31,000 














1 
























1 
1 
























I 
























!! 








,, 




30,000 














II 












29,000 
28,000 
27.000 
26,000 














!i 
























i; 
























i; 
























II 












25,000 














;| 












24,000 
23,000 
22,000 
21,000 














1 1 
























1 • 
























1 ! 
























; ; 












20,000 














* 1 












19,000 
18,000 
17,000 
16,000 












. 


; 1 




















? ' 


1 


j j 






















I 


I i 




















;s 


\ 


1 1 












15,000 












1 


1 1 












14,000 
13,000 
1 2,000 
11,000 








1 




; 


! ! 






1 












It 




S 


1 ! 






I 












1 < 




\ 


1 ! 






^ ^ 












j 






1 1 












10,000 








A 


t 


■J 


1 












9,000 
8,000 
7,000 
6,000 








1 






I 1 


















! 




y\ 








, 


f" 


r 








1 






1 






' 


I 








If j? 


! 


? 




1 












5,000 




^ 


i". i". 


I 






1 








j 




4,000 
3,000 
2,000 
1,000 



: 1/ > 


f \l '. 


,' 






1 








/ 






V 


& 1 


f 






1 






h 


\l 










P 






! 




r\ 




1 ^ 


'■■0 














1 




rA 


/^\r 


^.A'^ 




.') 












-r^S 


^ 


h-\^ 1 - 






1 1 1 1 

53 


nil 

35 60 6 


TTTT 

5 7 


Tiff 

7 
DICAl 
DICAl 


ffff 

5 £ 
"ES C 
■ES J 


TTl 1 r 
£ 

;hine 

ARAN 


1 1 li 
5 S 
-SE 
ESE 


1 1 1 1 

s 


1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

5 00 


1 1 1 1 III! 

5 10 


: 1 1 1 
5 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 139 

than San Francisco between 1857 and 1884. The 
above figures must therefore be considered only 
approximate, though they are the best that can be 
had. 

In this connection the reports of the census as to 
the number of Chinese in the United States at suc- 
cessive decades is interesting: 

I860 34,933 1890 107,488 

1870 63,199 1900 87,863 

1880 105,465 1910 73,531 

Were the Chinese in Alaska, Hawaii, and elsewhere 
in 1910 to be included, the Chinese population in the 
United States would read 94,648. Statistics as to 
sex, age, and many other elements have been kept 
only during recent years. It is impossible, accord- 
ingly, to secure accurate ideas as to many important 
factors, save for recent periods. Such statistics, 
however, as we do possess throw important light on 
the situation. 

Theoretically, Chinese immigration ceased in 1882. 
The chart showing the entire immigration from all 
countries since 1820 published by the Bureau of 
Immigration in its annual reports, shows that no 
Chinese immigrants have entered America since 
1882. In the body of the successive annual reports, 
however, Chinese immigrants and non-immigrants 
are listed along with similar classes from other 
lands, and are classified in all the various ways ap- 
plied to the other peoples. 



140 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

The Chinese exclusion law, it is ever to be remem- 
bered, forbade the coming to America only of 
laborers. Non-laborers of various specified classes 
have been allowed to enter, and so long as these thus 
admitted retain their status they have not been and 
are not now liable to deportation. Laborers who 
were in America when the exclusion act was passed 
were given the right to return to the United States 
should they at any time visit their home land. 

Since 1905 those admitted have been carefully 
classified as to class or status.^ 

TOTAL CHINESE ADMITTED TO AND DEPORTED 
FROM THE UNITED STATES (1905-1916) 





Admitted 


Deported 


United States citizens 


20,415 

905 

10,520 

10,401 

2,382 

8,292 

2,726 

476 

237 

1,078 

900 


2,059 

55 

192 

383 

363 

1,690 

118 

17 

3 

4 

549 


Wives of citizens 


Returning laborers 

Returning merchants 

Other merchants 


Members of merchants' families 

Students 

Travellers 


Teachers 


Officials 


Miscellaneous 


Total 


58,332 


5,433 





Especially notable in the above table are the 20,415 
Chinese who were admitted because they were 

^ For the years 1905-1908, U. S. Annual Immigration Reports, 
Table 2. For the years 1909-1916, U. S. Annual Immigration 
Reports, Table 1. 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 141 

"citizens" of the United States. Some of these 
20,415 may have visited China and returned to the 
United States more than once. The large number 
of "returning laborers" (10,520) and of "returning 
merchants "(10,401) is also highly significant. Add- 
ing together the above three classes (41,336) we see 
that two-thirds of those admitted (1905-1916) con- 
sist of Chinese who had already been in the United 
States. This leaves only 17,000 newcomers in the 
course of twelve years. Of these, 4,517 consist of 
transients such as students (2,726). officials (1,078), 
travellers (476), and teachers (237). Of the re- 
mainder, moreover, 8,292 consist of Chinese relatives 
coming to join their families. In twelve years only 
2,382 merchants had arrived who had no previous 
relations with this country. 

Of those recorded in the above table, it is not 
plain who are regarded as immigrants and who as 
non-immigrants. Indeed, efforts to answer this as 
well as other questions disclose rather disconcert- 
ing discrepancies in the statistics furnished by the 
bureau. 

For instance: From Tables VII and XIII we 
learn that the number of Chinese immigrants ad- 
mitted between 1909 and 1916 (inclusive) was 15,610 
and of non-immigrants was 23,031, making a total 
of 38,641. From Table 1 we learn that dming those 
same years the total number of Chinese admitted 
to the United States was 45,115. Striking the dif- 



142 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

ference we find that 6,474 Chinese were admitted 
who were neither immigrants nor non-immigrants, 
presumably, therefore, American citizens. But the 
number of American "citizens" admitted in those 
years was 16,326 or 9,854 more than Tables VII and 
XIII make room for. How to account for this dis- 
crepancy the tables do not show. 

These tables also disclose the rather serious fact 
that during these twelve years 5,433 Chinese have 
been deported, 2,059 of them claiming that they 
were American citizens. In this connection the 
reader should turn back to the quotation rendered by 
Judge Morton In re Chin Loy You, cited in Chapter 
III. 

How many Chinese women have come to, and re- 
mained in, the United States ? The facts seem to be 
these: Until 1883 (inclusive) the total arrivals 
seem to have been 8,895, while those arriving be- 
tween 1884 and 1916 amounted to 4,574, making a 
total of 13,469.^ The record of departures of Chinese 
women seems to be more imperfect than that of the 
departures of Chinese as a whole. The census for 
1910, however, gives the following figures as to the 
nimibers of Chinese men and women in Continental 
United States, and their ratios at the respective 
decades. 

^ The sources for these figures are: 1851-1909, Professor Coolidge's 
"Chinese Immigration," p. 502; 1904-1907, Reports of Bureau of 
Immigration, Table III; 1907-1916, Reports of Bureau of Immigra- 
tion, Table VII. 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 143 



CHINESE MALES AND FEMALES IN CONTINENTAL 
UNITED STATES 



Census 



1860 
1870 
1880 
1890 
1900 
1910 



Male 



33,149 
58,633 
100,686 
103,620 
85,341 
66,856 



Female 



1,784 
4,566 
4,779 
3,868 
4,522 
4,675 



Males per 
EACH Female 



18.58 
12.84 
21.06 
26.78 
18.87 
14.30 



THE CENSUS OF 1910 GIVES THE AGES OF THE 
CHINESE POPULATION AS FOLLOWS: 



Ages 


Male 


Female 


Totals 


Under 5 years 

5-14 years 

15-24 years 

25-44 years 

45-64 years 

65 years and over .... 
Age unknown 


719 
1,743 
7,038 
24,456 
29,113 
2,268 
1,519 


624 

1,096 

852 

1,497 

534 

62 

10 


1,343 
2,839 
7,890 
25,953 
29,647 
2,330 
1,529 


Total 


66,856 


4,675 


71,531 



In other words, according to the census of 1910, 
while there were in the United States 60,607 males 
between fifteen and sixty-four years, there were only 
2,883 women of the same ages. Note also that 
nearly one-half of the men were over forty-five years 
of age, and had therefore passed the point of their 
highest physical efficiency. As we shall see, the 
records of emigration show that large numbers of 
those departing have been in the United States 
twenty years and over. 



144 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

As to the marital condition of the Chinese as shown 
by the census of 1910, the facts are these. Out of 
66,856 males in the United States, 36,790 were single 
and 26,451 were married. It follows, therefore, that 
most of the married men had their wives in China. 

As to the women, out of 4,675 recorded in the cen- 
sus for 1910, those under fifteen years of age and 
single numbered 1,718, two being married. Only 
2,018 women were married, while 229 were widows, 
and 5 were divorced. Of these married women, 
1,569 were between twenty and forty-four years of 
age. 

If we assume that all of the 1,343 children under 
five years of age were born in the United States to 
the above 2,018 married women, we observe that the 
Chinese families did not have on the average one 
child each under five years of age. 

The table on the next page is the basis for the 
foregoing statements. It also gives additional facts 
concerning the marital state of Chinese in the United 
States. 

Since 1910 the annual reports of the Commissioner 
of Immigration contain figures as to the marital 
condition of immigrants from which the following 
facts are summarized.^ The marital state of non- 
inamigrants does not seem to have been kept. 

Of the total number of male immigrants admitted, 
fourteen to forty-four years of age, 4,919 were 

1 Immigration Reports, Table VII B. 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 145 

single, 4,121 were married, and only 52 were widowed. 
Of 1,939 males forty-five years of age and over, only 
17 were single and 29 widowed, while 1,893 were 
married. Of course their wives were doubtless all 
in China. 

MARITAL CONDITION OF CHINESE IN CONTINENTAL 
UNITED STATES. CENSUS 1910 





Single 


a 

M 

K 

a 
•< 


a 

o 

a 


a 
m 

V 

a 
o 

> 




M 


Males — totals 

Under 15 years . . . 
15 years and over 


No. 
36,790 

2,460 
34,330 


% 
55 

99.9 
53.3 


26,451 

2 

26,449 


1,139 
1,139 


45 
'45" 


2,431 
2,431 


Females — totals 

Under 15 

15 years and over. . 

15-19 years 

20-24 years 

25-29 years 

30-34 years 

35 and over 


2,398 

1,718 

680 

300 

144 

55 

42 

139 


51.3 
99.9 
23.0 
78.9 
30.5 
12.9 
10.0 


2,018 

2 

2,016 

77 

316 

357 

352 

914 


229 
229 

"s 

8 
21 
92 


5 
5 

i 

2 

2 


25 

"25 
3 
4 
4 
1 
13 



As for the females, 194 were under fourteen years 
of age. Of 1,544 females between the ages of fifteen 
and forty-four, only 165 were single, the rest being 
either married (1,365) or widowed (14). No Chi- 
nese male or female immigrant admitted during the 
seven years under consideration was divorced. Of 
the 160 unmarried female immigrants admitted, 
119 were between fourteen and twenty-one years 
of age, 34 between twenty-two and twenty-nine, 
and 7 over thii'ty years old. 



146 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

Since 1896 records have been kept in regard to the 
sex, age, ilHteracy, financial condition, and certain 
other facts concerning all immigrants to the United 
States. Since 1909 similar facts have been recorded 
in regard to non-immigrants. Collecting from the 
successive annual "reports figures dealing with 
Chinese, we find quite a number of illuminating 
facts.^ 

Out of 39,415 immigrants, fourteen years of age 
and over, admitted between 1896 and 1916, 2,941 
were totally illiterate. Until 1908 no distinction 
was made between male and female illiterates. 
Since that date, however, to 449 male illiterates 
there were 1,091 female illiterates, although the total 
female immigrants amounted to only 2,013 while 
the total male immigrants amounted to 14,860. In 
other words, among Chinese female immigrants the 
illiterate were more than one-half. 

From 1909 to 1916 the total number of male non- 
immigrants was 22,574, of whom 1,713 were illiter- 
ate, while of the 1,357 female non-immigrants, only 
132 were illiterate. How to account for this very 
large number of illiterates among the non-immigrant 
males is an interesting question, for a smaller illiter- 
acy was to be expected among the non-immigrants 
than among the immigrants. 

The following table of Chinese illiteracy is taken 
from the census for 1910: 

1 Tables VII and XIII. 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 147 



CHINESE ILLITERATES IN CONTINENTAL UNITED 

STATES. CENSUS 1910 



Ages 


Total 


Illitbbate 


Per Cent 


Ten years of age and over . . . 
Males 

10-19 years 

20-34 years 

35-54 years 

55 and over 


68,924 
65,479 
4,144 
13,687 
33,800 
12,329 


10,891 
9,849 
302 
1,666 
4,944 
2,890 


15.8 


Females 

10-19 years 

20-34 years 

35-54 years 

55 and over 


3,445 

870 

1,315 

1,317 

233 


1,042 

88 

427 

408 

136 


30.2 



Since 1896 records have been kept of the amounts 
of money brought in by immigrants, and since 1909 
also by non-immigrants.^ 

Between 1896 and 1903 Chinese immigrants who 
brought in less than $30 each numbered 10,738, 
while those who exceeded that sum numbered 1,963. 

Between 1904 and 1916 the standard figure was 
$50. In that interval those who brought in over 
$50 number 6,573. The total amount brought by 
Chinese immigrants during this entire period (1896- 
1916) amounted to $1,233,631. 

Non-immigrants in the period between 1909 and 
1916 brought $1,188,029, of which 6,250 persons 
brought in less than $50 each. 

Records have been kept also in regard to the 
sources of the passage-money. Between 1908 and 

1 Tables VII and XIII. 



148 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

1916 passage was paid by relatives for 7,259 immi- 
grants, while 8,640 paid their own passage. Of the 
non-immigrants, 20,373 paid their own passage- 
moneys, while relatives paid the passage for 1,894. 

Another interesting item disclosed by the same 
tables is the destination of Chinese coming to our 
shores. Between 1908 and 1916 out of 16,873 immi- 
grants, 8,380 were on their way to join relatives 
and 4,088 to join friends. Among 23,031 non-immi- 
grants, on the other hand, for the years 1909 to 
1916, only 4,491 were going to join friends, while 
the remainder, 12,508, had neither friends nor 
relatives as their objectives. 

We turn next to such facts as may be learned 
from the reports as to arrivals and departures. 
For this purpose we have five tables to study (1, 
VII, XIII, VII^, and XlllA). Summaries of these 
tables give the following figures: 



CHINESE ADMITTED (1909-1916) 





Citizens 


Immiobants 


Non- 
immigrants 


Males 

Females 

Total 


1 16,328 


13,683 
1,927 


22,574 
1,357 


15,610 


23,031 


Age— 

Under 14 years 

14-44 years 

Over 44 years 

Total 




1,372 

12,150 

2,088 


642 

16,080 

6,309 




15,610 


23,031 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 149 



CHINESE DEPARTURES (1909-1916) 







Emiqbants 


NON- 
EMIOBANTa 


Males 

Females 




19,022 
439 


30,453 

824 


Total 




19,461 


31,277 




Age— 

Under 14 years 

14-44 years 

Over 44 years 

Total 





135 

6,210 

13,116 


780 

21,071 

9,426 




19,461 


31,277 




Residence in U. S. — 

Under 5 years 

5-10 years 

10-15 years 

15-20 years 

Over 20 years 

Unknown 




2,309 
2,558 
2,883 
2,680 
9,002 
29 


3,831 
3,910 
2,591 
2,294 
5,502 

13,149 


Residence outside 
U. S 


Total 




19,461 


31,277 





From these summaries of arrivals and departures 
the following facts appear. The total number of 
immigrant and non-immigrant Chinese admitted 
between the years 1909 and 1916 (inclusive) was 
38,641, while the departures during the same period 
amounted to 50,738. The Chinese population of 
the United States diminished therefore by 12,097. 
When, however, we distinguish between the sexes 
we discover that while 36,257 males arrived, 49,475 
departed, making the diminution of male population 



150 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

13,218. In the case of the females, on the other 
hand, while 3,284 arrived, only 1,263 departed, 
making an increase in the female population of 
2,021 in these past eight years. 

In addition to those recorded as immigrants and 
non-immigrants some 16,328 "citizens" (Table 1) 
were admitted. The record of departed "citizens" 
has been kept only since 1913 (Table 8). The 
number of those who departed in these four years 
has been 4,819, while those who have been admitted 
during the same years has been 8,327. One would 
suppose that Chinese "wives of citizens" would be 
admitted as "citizens." They appear, however, to 
be recorded as immigrants. 

We should especially note the fact that while 
19,461 men left the United States not expecting to 
return, 31,277 expected to be absent only tem- 
porarily. Of this number, however, 13,149 are 
recorded as having had their residence outside the 
United States. The correct figure, therefore, of 
those expecting to return to the United States would 
doubtless exclude this group; this gives us 18,128 
who left expecting to return. Of course the 4,819 
"citizens" who departed were all expecting to return, 
for they took pains to secure return certificates. 

Of those 19,461 planning not to return, 13,116 
were over forty-four years of age and 14,594 had 
lived continuously in the United States more than 
ten years, and 9,002 more than twenty years. 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 151 

The occupations of immigrants have been recorded 
since 1897 and of emigrants since 1908. From our 
careful compilation of the statistics we derive the 
following facts: 

Out of a total immigration of 40,023 (1897-1916), 
1,627 were classed as professionals (including 26 
clergy, 240 government officials, and 249 teachers), 
343 were classed as "skilled," and 33,198 others, 
of whom 5,877 were "laborers" and 18,474 were 
merchants. 

For the period between 1908 and 1916 (inclusive), 
while 1,082 "professionals" were admitted (220 
being government ofiicials and 199 teachers), only 
302 professionals are recorded as having departed. 

In contrast to these figures the number of the 
"skilled" admitted was only 128, while 1,164 de- 
parted ! 

The most striking difference between immigrants 
and emigrants occurs among "laborers," of whom 
651 were admitted to 14,263 departed. More immi- 
grant merchants on the other hand arrived than 
departed in this period (1908-1916), the figures 
being respectively 5,870 arrivals to 4,678 departures. 

The reasoning of the Bureau of Immigration in 
regard to classification is passing strange, not to say 
incomprehensible. Why should clergy, government 
officials, and teachers be classed as immigrants, and 
why should students be classed with women and 
children as immigrants having no occupation? 



152 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

This latter fact comes to light, not from the table, 
but from correspondence. 

The distribution of Chinese in the different sec- 
tions of the United States is given in the successive 
reports of the census. A comparison of the four 
decades shows that, while the Chinese population 
has settled largely on the Pacific coast, considerable 
movement has, nevertheless, taken place toward 
the Atlantic coast. The numbers on the Pacific 
coast have steadily diminished, while those on the 
east coast have steadily advanced. 



DISTRIBUTION OF CHINESE POPULATION. 
REPORTS, 1880-1910 



CENSUS 





1880 


1890 


1900 


1910 


United States 


105,465 


107,488 


89,863 


71,531 


New England 

Middle Atlantic 


401 
1,227 


1,488 
4,689 


4,203 
10,490 


3,499 
8,189 


East North Central. . 
West North Central. . 

South Atlantic 

East South Central. . . 
West South Central . . 


390 

423 

74 

90 

758 


1,254 

1,097 

669 

274 

1,173 


2,533 
1,135 
1,791 

427 
1,555 


3,451 
1,195 
1,582 
414 
1,303 


Mountain 


14,274 
87,828 


11,572 
85,272 


7,950 
59,779 


5,614 
46,320 


Pacific 





Chinese who plan to leave the United States tem- 
porarily are allowed to secure certificates of residence 
which will permit entry upon their return. Statistics 
of these facts have been published for the years 
1911-1916 (Table 5). From these it appears that 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 153 

in this interval 6,423 American-born citizens were 
granted such certificates while 491 professing to be 
native-born citizens were refused return certificates. 
Of the classes whose immigration is not forbidden 
by our Chinese exclusion laws, 5,399 were granted 
certificates of return and also 4,740 "laborers," 
making a total of 16,562 Chinese who left the United 
States in the period indicated who took with them 
return certificates. The total number to whom 
such certificates were refused was 1,163. The sta- 
tistics of Table 8 may well be considered in this 
connection. They deal with the departures of 
those carrying return certificates while Table 5 
deals with applications for certificates, without 
stating when those receiving them actually de- 
parted. This doubtless accounts for certain appar- 
ent discrepancies. The ignominy of this procedure 
we impose on no other people. 

Certain statistics are given by the Bureau of Immi- 
gration as to the basis upon which American-born 
Chinese citizens were admitted to the United States 
for the years 1908-1916 (Table 3). It appears that 
in this period 8,720 Chinese entered the United 
States who had secured determination by the author- 
ities of the fact that they were citizens before they 
left, while 2,116 had that fact determined only upon 
their return. In addition to these, 5,049 were ad- 
mitted as citizens, though born in China, on the 
ground that their fathers were American citizens. 



154 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

These facts raise certain questions regarding the 
law that children of immigrants born in America are 
for that mere reason American citizens, and that 
children born abroad of these American-born fathers 
are also citizens. On the basis of these laws children 
born in America but sent to China and "reared to 
manhood there, or even born and reared in China of 
Chinese fathers who were born in America, can claim 
free admittance to the United States and to rights 
of suffrage, even though they are absolutely ignorant 
of English and have no knowledge whatever of Amer- 
ican life, of our government, or of the Constitution. 
The recommendations of the Commissioner of Edu- 
cation (Report of the Department of Labor, 1916, p. 
161) in regard to this matter should be given speedy 
and serious consideration. 

The Federal Commission on Industrial Relations 
calls attention in its report (1915) to the same mat- 
ter. It states that "Chinese arrested for being un- 
lawfully in the United States set up the claim of 
nativity." It adds that "a rather dangerous situa- 
tion is developing" (pp. 244-245). The commission 
also makes a number of rather important recommen- 
dations with regard to the problems raised by the 
"smuggling or other illegal entry of Asiatics into the 
United States." 

The Immigration Bureau reports in detail as to 
the number of Chinese in the United States arrested, 
discharged, and deported. These facts are given for 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 155 

the years 1909-1916 (Table 6). From a compila- 
tion of these statistics we learn that in the period in- 
dicated, 4,022 Chinese were arrested on the ground 
of not being lawfully in the country. Of these, 1,212 
were discharged, the evidence presented by the 
officials being inadequate, whUe 2,928 were deported, 
and 161 either escaped or died before the decision 
of the court was reached. Is it not a serious reflec- 
tion on the efficiency and fair dealing of the federal 
administrative oJBScials that 30 per cent of the arrests 
should prove to be of men who are innocent ? The 
question naturally arises as to wnat compensation 
or redress such Chinese have for the indignity and 
expense that has been inflicted upon them by oflfi- 
cials who, to say the least, are certainly inefficient. 
Here again the reader may well reflect on the state- 
ments of Judge Morton quoted in Chapter III. His 
attention is especially called to the quotations given 
in the Appendix to this chapter. 

The number of those debarred between 1899-1916 
was 5,959; of these, 991 were classed as having 
"loathsome or contagious diseases," 456 as "likely 
to become public charges," and 4,313 as being de- 
barred by the Chinese exclusion laws. 

Effort has been made to find statistics which would 
differentiate the Hawaiian Islands from Continental 
United States. A few facts along this line have 
already been presented. In general the statistics 
are meagre. From Tables IX and IX A we secure 



156 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

certain figures for immigrants and emigrants for 
the years 1909 to 1916. As there are no similar 
figures for non-immigrants and non-emigrants, a full 
view of the changes in Chinese population in Con- 
tinental United States and Hawaii considered sep- 
arately is not to be had. A summary of these tables 
shows that during the period under consideration 
those leaving Continental United States not expect- 
ing to return (17,155) exceeded the number (14,715) 
of those admitted who expect to remain here by 
2,440, while the corresponding figures for the Ha- 
waiian Islands were: emigrants, 2,306; immigrants, 
895, giving an excess of permanent departures of 
1,411. 

An interesting table is given in the census of 1910 
(vol. I, p. 1070) showing the number of males 
twenty-one years of age and over classified according 
to citizenship. It appears that of the 60,421 Chi- 
nese males twenty-one years of age and over in the 
United States at the time of the census of 1910, 
8,463 were American bom, 1,368 were naturalized, 
and 483 others had taken out first papers! The 
naturalization of the Chinese in the United States 
ceased, of course, in 1882, but continued in the 
Hawaiian Islands until those islands were annexed 
in 1900, at which time all Chinese and others who 
were citizens of Hawaii were accepted as citizens of 
the United States. The above figures, however, 
do not include Chinese in the Territory of Hawaii. 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 157 

The table shows also how they were distributed in 
the various sections of the United States. 

Between the years 1910-1916 the total number of 
Chinese non-immigrants admitted to the Philippine 
Islands was 42,779; while the number of non-emi- 
grant departures was 52,537. Apparently those 
who enter for a temporary stay, leave only for a 
temporary absence. 

This must suffice for our study of the Chinese in 
the United States. We turn next to a study of the 
Japanese. 

Appendix to Chapter X 

The September (1909) number of the Annals of 
the American Academy of Political and Social Sci- 
ence was devoted to the problem of Chinese and 
Japanese in America. Many important discussions 
are there given with which the student who wishes 
to be thoroughly informed should be acquainted. 
Quotations are here presented from two articles 
which throw important light on American mistreat- 
ment of Chinese. 

From "The Enforcement of the Chinese Ex- 
clusion Law/' by James Bronson Reynolds: 

"On the twenty-ninth day of the eleventh moon 
of Peng Ng year, that is, January 13, 1907, there 
appeared on the walls of many buildings in the 
Chinese quarter of Singapore a declaration from 
which I take the following statement: ^In America 



158 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

we are one and all ill-treated as if we were criminals, 
no distinction being made between officials, mer- 
chants, students, and ordinary people. There the 
disgrace inflicted upon us may be said to be carried 
to its fullest limit. . . . Given by Lam Hong Wai, 
the man who proposes to revive the boycott.' The 
signer of this declaration was a well-known, pros- 
perous Chinese merchant of Singapore, and his judg- 
ment on the American Bureau of Immigration, I 
am informed, voiced the general sentiment of in- 
telligent Chinamen. 

"A few months previous to the above pronuncia- 
mento, I was visited by a Chinese merchant, who 
told me the following experience of a brother mer- 
chant of New York. A son of the latter, born in 
this country, hence entitled under the law to live 
here, had gone to Canton to receive a Chinese educa- 
tion. On the completion of his studies he returned 
to this country. Upon reaching San Francisco, in 
spite of the fact that he was a first-class passenger 
and carried papers establishing his American birth, 
he was stopped and confined in the 'pen,' the rough 
quarters in which detained immigrants were lodged. 
Upon this detention he wired his father, who at 
once started for San Francisco. The father found 
on arrival that his son had been ordered deported. 
The father retained an American lawyer, who ap- 
pealed from the local decision on the case to the 
higher immigration authorities in Washington, Two 
days later the father was visited by a Chinese inter- 
preter in the service of the American government, 
who told him that he had wasted time in appealing 
to Washington and that fifty dollars given to the 
right man would have 'fixed' the case. The inter- 
preter stated subsequently that even then one hun- 
dred dollars would arrange the matter. This amount 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 159 

was promptly paid and the next day the father and 
son started east. 

''Similar incidents were told me by Chinese mer- 
chants and officials as well as by American mission- 
aries. Some of their tales were well substantiated; 
some were of doubtful truth. But unfortunately 
the fiction was not more discreditable than the 
truth. An able Chinese governor^ since made vice- 
roy, stated to me that though he desired to send 
students from his province to America, he was de- 
terred from doing so by the treatment accorded to 
Chinese students at American ports of entry." 
(Pp. 363-364.) 

From "Un-American Character of Race Legisla- 
tion," by Max J. Kohler: 

"Alleged difficulties in the enforcement of these 
laws and attempted evasions thereof — scarcely sus- 
tained, however, by our official government census, 
which recorded 105,465 Chinese residents in 1880, 
106,000 in 1890 and only 93,000 in 1900, with 70,000 
the present official estimate of the Department of 
Commerce and Labor — led to legislation for the 
registration of all resident Chinese laborers, under 
heavy and previously unheard-of extra-constitutional 
penalties, and danger of arrest of all Chinese, on the 
claim that they should have registered, and strin- 
gent, often unobtainable, proof on the part of all 
non-laborers was demanded. The law was admin- 
istered on the theory that only 'teachers, students, 
merchants or travelers from curiosity' may enter. 
The exclusion of 'bankers,' 'traders,' physicians, 
actors, etc., because not affirmatively emmaerated, 
was ordered. The determination by administrative 
officers cf all applications to enter was made final. 



160 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

with no right of resort to the courts on the difficult 
and important questions of law and fact involved, 
even with respect to claims to American citizenship. 
Uncontradicted evidence was disregarded in a way 
not sustained in any other class of cases; arrest and 
detention and a shifting of the burden of proof upon 
defendants, wholly abhorrent to our Anglo-Saxon 
system of jurisprudence, was practiced and held 
to be constitutional, despite bills of rights, on the 
theory that the right to exclude and expel aliens 
may be pursued by extra-constitutional methods. 
In short, there was instituted a constant reign of 
terror for all Chinese or alleged Chinese residents, 
laborers or non-laborers. Their liberty is constantly 
jeopardized by harsh and oppressive laws, and their 
property is accordingly also endangered under the 
sentiment thereby engendered that they are be- 
yond the protection of our laws. Only one who, 
like the writer, has become familiar in practice with 
the injustice and barbarity of these laws in their 
actual practical workings, can realize that such 
practices can exist amid our boasted American 
civilization. The Chinese have little access to our 
public prints and have substantially no votes, and 
when even their officials, vehemently but righteously 
decline to join in doing honor to a military officer 
who had made an unauthorized extension of these 
anti-Chinese enactments to our new Asiatic posses- 
sion, to breed such race prejudice on that continent, 
too, they become persona non grata V^ (Pp. 283- 
284.) 

"A reference in passing to recent statutes au- 
thorizing the expulsion, within three years after 
landing, of any aliens for alleged specified causes 
by mere administrative action, with right denied 
of judicial review, indicates how invidious is the 



CHINESE IN THE UNITED STATES 161 

atmosphere which engenders such legislation. It 
creates a dangerous condition for all aliens and 
alleged aliens, in placing their rights on an adminis- 
trative footing inferior to those of citizens, contrary 
to the American spirit. On the other hand, as re- 
gards Chinese residents, it should not be forgotten 
that the statutory discriminations against them 
and their testimony and their subjection to irre- 
sponsible petty executive officers, has created a 
spirit of disregard for their persons and property 
of a very far-reaching character, and has resulted 
in their often becoming the victims of official bribery 
and extortion, to which Oriental races may be pecu- 
liarly susceptible. This cannot be measured merely 
by the already appreciable number of convictions 
and dismissals of government officials for these 
causes, that happen to have taken place. It is but 
fair to say, in this connection, that there have been 
but comparatively few wholesale arrests of resident 
Chinese under our exclusion laws since the famous 
Boston raid of Sunday, October 11, 1902, when about 
250 Chinese persons, in fact all the Chinese residents 
of Boston who could be found, were simultaneously 
arrested, nearly all to be subsequently discharged, 
after sustaining gross hardships and injuries. 
Hon. John W. Foster has ably described this con- 
temporary imitation of the ' Black Hole of Calcutta,' 
and the large public meeting of protest in Faneuil 
Hall following it, in an article on 'The Chinese 
Boycott,' in the Atlantic Monthly, January, 1906." 



CHAPTER XI 
JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 

The annual immigration of the Japanese to the 
United States passed the 100 mark in 1885; and the 
1,000 mark in 1891. As in the case of the Chinese, 
the statistics furnished by the Bureau of Immigra- 
tion are far from complete. Previous to 1870 the 
total Japanese arrivals had slightly exceeded 100. 
Between 1870 and 1879 some 164 are recorded as 
arriving, and during the eighties only 1,874 entered. 
Between 1890 and 1899 the immigration averaged 
about 1,500 annually. The following decade saw 
the large immigration. During the first year (1900) 
of the decade 12,628 arrived, 20,041 in 1903, and 
30,842 in 1907. The "gentlemen's agreement" 
then went into operation and immigration fell to 
16,418 in 1908, and to 3,275 in 1909, the total for 
the decade being 142,536. Between 1910 and 1916 
(inclusive) Japanese immigration amounted to 48,- 
108. This gives a grand total of about 208,000. 

Since 1900 non-immigrants have been distin- 
guished from immigrants. Between 1900 and 1908 
(inclusive) non-immigrants are reported to the 
extent of 4,721 (by country),^ while from 1909- 

^ Source: Senate Documents, No. 747 — 61st Congress, 3d Session; 
Report of Immigration Commission, vol. I, pp. 66-96, Table IX, 
Parts 1 and 2. 

162 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 163 

1916 (inclusive) there were 22,074 (by race), giving 
a total record of non-immigrants of 27,511 between 
1900 and 1916. This brings the total of alien Japa- 
nese admitted to the United States as immigrants 
and non-immigrants to 233,582. It is to be remem- 
bered, however, that these statistics exclude the 
Hawaiian Islands before, and include them since, 
1900. With the annexation of those islands their 
entire Japanese population of some 61,111 was sud- 
denly added to the Japanese population of the United 
States, thus bringing the total nearly up to 300,000. 
The record of departures is exceedingly fragmen- 
tary. In their place we may note the record of the 
census for the successive periods showing how many 
Japanese were present in the United States at the 
time of each census. 

JAPANESE POPULATION IN THE UNITED STATES 
AND HAWAII 



Census 


United States 


Hawaii 


Malb 


Female 


Total 


Male 


Female 


Total 


1870 

1880 

1890 

1900 

1910 


47 

134 

1,780 

23,341 

63,070 


8 

14 

259 

985 

9,087 


55 

148 

2,039 

24,326 

72,157 


47,508 
54,785 


13,603 

24,891 


12,3601 

61,111 

79,675 



As in the case of the Chinese, so here the Bureau 
of Immigration provides us with statistics, increas- 

^ This figure does not include Hawaiian-born Japanese. 



164 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

ingly complete as time passes. The sex and illiter- 
acy of immigrants is reported beginning with the 
year 1896^ and of non-immigrants, emigrants, and 
non-emigrants from 1909.^ From these tables we 
secure the following summary: 

JAPANESE ADMITTED TO AND DEPARTED FROM THE 
UNITED STATES (1896-1916) 





1896-1908 


1909-1916 


Male 


Fe- 
male 


Total 


Male 


Fe- 
male 


Total 


Arrivals — 

Immigrants . . 1 
Non- 
immigrants J 

Total 


126,835 


20,687 


147,522 


1 19,960 
1 19,685 


31,423 
2,389 


51,383 
22,074 


39,645 


33,812 


73,457 


Departures — 

Emigrants 

Non-emigrants . 

Total 


.... 






13,047 
41,739 


3,208 
8,611 


16,255 
50,350 


54,786 


11,819 


66,605 



From the above table the following facts appear. 
During the period of largest immigration (thirteen 
years, 1896-1908) 126,835 men arrived, and only 
20,687 women. How many left the United States 
during these years we do not know. After the 
"gentlemen's agreement" went into effect (eight 
years, 1909-1916), 39,645 men and 33,812 women 
were admitted. In this same period, however, 
54,786 men returned to Japan and only 11,819 
women. To put the facts from a different angle, 

1 Tables VII, XIII, VII^-XIIIA, 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 165 

the Japanese alien male population of the United 
States diminished by 15,141, while the Japanese alien 
female population increased by 21,993. The en- 
tire increase of Japanese population in the United 
States by arrivals over departures was 6,852 in eight 
years. These figures it is to be remembered include 
the Hawaiian Islands. 

These facts are so contrary to the ordinary im- 
pression sedulously cultivated by anti-Japanese 
agitators that for the sake of emphasis and ease of 
reference I present them in another form. 

Total alien Japanese male departures (1909-1916) 54,786 

Total arrivals (1909-1916) 39,645 

Decrease of alien Japanese males in U. S 15,141 

Total alien Japanese females entered U. S. (1909-1916). . . . 33,812 

Total alien Japanese females departed (1909-1916) 11,819 

Increase of alien Japanese females in U. S 21,993 

The foregoing statistics take no account of births 
or deaths, and it is to be remembered that these 
figures mclude arrivals to and departures from the 
Hawaiian Islands. We shall see later on that of 
the above decrease of males about one-half took place 
in the Hawaiian Islands and one-half in Continental 
United States. In regard to the increase of females 
also approximately one-half was in Hawaii and one- 
haK in Continental United States. 

Arrivals exceeded departures (1909-1916) in the 
case of those under fourteen years of age by 1,454, 
and by 10,657 of those between fourteen and ioitj- 



166 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 



AGE OF ALIEN JAPANESE ARRIVING AND DEPARTING 





1896-1908 


1909-1916 


Arrivals 
Immigrants — 

Under 14 years 


2,365 

142,649 

2,508 


2,764 

46,118 

2,501 


11-11 years 


Over 44 years 


Non-immigrants — 

Under 14 years 


147,522 


51,383 

280 

19,840 

1,954 


14-44 years 


Over 44 years 







22,074 


Departures 
Emigrants — 

Under 14 years 


.... 


719 

12,509 

3,027 


14—44 years 


44 and over 


Non-emigrants — 
Under 14 years 


.... 


16,255 

871 

42,792 
6,687 


14-44 years 


Over 44 years 




.... 


50,350 



four years old, while of those over forty-four years 
old the departures exceeded arrivals by 5,259. 
These figures show that the vast majority of the 
Japanese coming to America are in the prime of 
life, while of those who have passed the prime of 
life departures largely exceed arrivals. 

An interesting inquiry concerns the length of 
residence of those leaving the United States. 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 167 



LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN UNITED STATES 
OF JAPANESE ALIENS. DEPARTING (1909-1916)1 





Emigbants 


NON- 
EMIGRANTS 


Total 


Not over 5 years 

5-10 years 


5,466 
5,643 
3,038 
1,457 
593 
67 


10,960 

22,107 

8,108 

2,582 

1,124 

5*469 


16,426 

27,750 

11,146 

4,039 

1,717 

67 

5,469 


10—15 years 


15—20 years 


Over 20 years 

Unknown 


Residence outside U. S. 


16,264 2 


50,350 


66,614 



We note first that of the 50,350 non-emigrants 
leaving the United States, 5,469 had not been resi- 
dent in the United States at all. They simply- 
passed through it. Is it not surprising to find them 
classed as non-emigrants, for this class consists of 
those who are leaving the United States for only a 
temporary absence? Disregarding this group, how- 
ever, we find that while 16,264 left the country not 
expecting to return, 44,881 (50,350-5,469 = 44,- 
881) left the United States with the definite ex- 
pectation of returning in the near future, of whom 
33,067 had lived in the United States less than ten 
years. 

We turn next to the question of the degree of illit- 
eracy of Japanese admitted to the United States. 

1 Tables XII A and XHI A. 

' The discrepancy of 9 between this figure and the figure (16,255) 
on a previous page is due to the inclusion here of 9 persons in 1909 
whose sex and age were unknown. 



168 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

The following table gives a summary view. We 
have omitted the few cases of those who could read 
but not write, and have included only those who 
could neither read nor write. 



ILLITERACY OF JAPANESE ALIENS ADMITTED TO THE 
UNITED STATES 





1896-1908 


1909-1916 


Immigrants — 

Male 


, 34,441 


1,736 
7,813 

9 549 


Female 


Total 


Non-immigrants — 

Male 


661 
407 
1,068 


Female 


Total 


Total illiterates 


10,617 



It thus appears that out of a total arrival of 
Japanese from 1896 to 1908 of 147,522, nearly a 
quarter (34,441) could neither read nor write. This 
effectually substantiates the contention of those who 
complain that a very considerable fraction of Japa- 
nese admitted were members of the lowest classes in 
Japan. 

But it is a matter of no little surprise that since 
the "gentlemen's agreement" went into effect, out 
of 80,057 total admissions, 10,617 illiterates should 
have been allowed by the Japanese Government to 
come. Of these it is to be observed 8,220 were 
women. 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 169 

It is a matter of regret that the illiteracy of those 
departing is not recorded; for then we could know 
whether or not the degree of their education makes 
any difference with their capacity for satisfactory 
residence in this country. The records also fail to 
show whether the illiterates come equally to Con- 
tinental United States and to Hawaii. 

The census for 1900 and for 1910 gives the follow- 
ing figures regarding Japanese illiterates in Con- 
tinental United States: 



JAPANESE IN CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES 10 YEARS 
OF AGE AND OVER 





1900 


1910 


Total 
No. 


Illitehatb 


Total 

No. 


Illitebatb 


No. 


Per 

Cent 


No. 


Per 

Cent 


Male 

Female 

Total. . . . 


23,214 

877 


4,211 
175 


18.1 
20.0 


60,809 

6,852 


5,247 
966 


8.6 
14.1 


24,091 


4,386 


18.2 


67,661 


6,213 


9.2 



This table shows that in the decade intervening 
between the census of 1900 and that of 1910 the 
illiteracy of Japanese men fell from 18.1 per cent to 
8.6 per cent, while that of the women fell from 20 
per cent to 14.1 per cent. There is abundant reason 
for believing that the next census will disclose a very 
great reduction of Japanese illiterates in Continental 
United States. 

The Immigration Bureau has kept records of the 



170 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

amounts of money brought by incoming Japanese. 
Between 1896 and 1908 the total amount brought 
in by immigrants was $6;055,562, and between 1909 
and 1916 $2,124,686, while non-immigrants between 
1909 and 1916 (inclusive) brought $2,248,425, mak- 
ing a total of cash brought into the country of 
$10,428,673(1896-1916). 

Out of 51,383 immigrants arriving between 1909 
and 1916 (inclusive) 10,499 paid their own passage- 
money, 40,407 had their passage paid by relatives, 
and 527 were provided for by others. Among non- 
immigrants for the same period 18,914 paid their own 
way, 2,443 were provided for by relatives, and 717 
were assisted by others. 

For the same period, of the immigrants, 41,284 
came to join relatives, and 4,140 came to join friends, 
leaving 5,959 who had other destinations, while of 
the non-immigrants 4,942 were coming to friends 
and 11,029 had neither kind of objective. 

We turn next to the question of the proportions 
of the sexes and their marital condition. On this 
subject the records of the immigration reports are 
exceedingly imperfect. We turn first of all, there- 
fore, to the census reports, from which the tables on 
the opposite page have been compiled. 

From these tables we learn that while there were 
59,344 men between the ages of fifteen and sixty- 
four, there were 6,590 women of the same ages. 
This proportion was in marked contrast to the pro- 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 171 

portion of sexes in the case of the Chinese. We 
have already seen that between 1909 and 1916 the 
Japanese male population diminished by 15,141, 

JAPANESE MALES AND FEMALES IN CONTINENTAL 
UNITED STATES 



Cbnscb 


Males 


Females 


Males fbb 
Female 


1870 


47 

134 

1,780 

23,341 

63,070 


8 

14 

259 

985 

9,087 


6.87 

23.69 

6.94 


1880 


1890 


1900 


1910 





THE AGES OF JAPANESE RECORDED IN THE 
CENSUS OF 1910 ARE AS FOLLOWS: 





Male 


Female 


Total 


Under 5 years 

5—14 years 


1,689 

845 

13,703 

42,596 

3,045 

38 

1,154 


1,719 

720 

1,885 

4,531 

174 

32 

56 


3,408 

1,565 
15,588 
47,127 

3,219 
40 

1,210 


15-24 years 


25-44 years 


45—64 years 


65 and over 


Unknown 


Total 


63,070 


9,087 


72,157 





while the Japanese female population increased by 
21;993. As these latter figures include Japanese 
arriving at and leaving the Hawaiian Islands, they 
cannot be immediately compared with the figures of 
the above table. But they do show that the dis- 
parity between the sexes is rapidly diminishing. 



172 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

The marital condition of the Japanese is shown by 
the census of 1910 as follows : 

MARITAL CONDITION OF JAPANESE IN CONTINENTAL 
UNITED STATES. CENSUS of 1910 





Single 


a 

H 

M 

« 
■•1 




o 

Q 




» 

> 



z 

Kl 


No. 


Per 

Cent 


Male total 


45,222 


71.7 


15,918 


495 


86 


1,349 


Under 15 years. . . . 
15 years and over. 


2,534 

42,688 


100. 
70.5 


15,918 


495 


86 


1,349 


Female total 


3,346 


36.1 


5,582 


96 


17 


46 


Under 15 years. . . . 
15 years and over . . 

15-19 years 

20-24 years 

25-29 years 

30-34 years 

35 years and over . 


2,438 
908 
170 
229 
264 
146 
99 


100. 
13.7 
49.1 
14.9 
13.3 
9.9 


1 

5,581 
174 
1,298 
1,691 
1,307 
1,111 


96 

"5 
16 
12 
63 


17 

6 
5 
2 
4 


46 
2 
1 
5 
3 

35 



If we assume that all the Japanese married women 
in the United States are living with their husbands 
here, then the number of married men who have 
wives in Japan at the time of the census was 10,336. 
Many of these wives no doubt are among the 21,256 
women who came to America between 1909 and 
1916. 

It is interesting to observe that there were 738 
immarried women over twenty years of age, and 113 
more of the same age who were either widows or 
divorced. We should note also the small number of 
those who were divorced. 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 173 

While the Chinese families in America numbered 
only 2,018 to a total population of 71,531, the 
number of Japanese families to a total Japanese 
population of 72,157 was 5,582. It is a surprise, 
therefore, to observe that in these 5,582 families 
there were only 3,408 children under five years of 
age. 

The marital condition of immigrants has been 
recorded since 1910, but not of non-immigrants. 
Of 15,025 male Japanese immigrants admitted 
during the seven years recorded, 1,649 were under 
fourteen years of age; of the remainder, 9,238 were 
single and 5,754 were married; while of the 28,061 
female immigrants admitted, 966 were under four- 
teen years of age, of those from fourteen to forty- 
four years of age 1,808 were single, and 26,225 
were married, most of them doubtless to husbands 
whom they were coming to join. Of the 1,728 un- 
married females fourteen to forty-four years of age, 
1,451 were from fourteen to twenty-one years old, 
237 were from twenty-two to twenty-nine, and 90 
were from thirty to forty-four years old. 

In this connection we present a summary of cer- 
tain statistics (1914) published by the Dendo Dan 
in regard to Japanese population in the States of 
California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colo- 
rado. They are classified by sex, heads of families, 
children, and others, and also under 86 varieties of 
occupation. 



174 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

Heads of families 49,759 

Wives 11,833 

Children 9,576 

Others 445 

Total 71,613 

According to these figures the total number of 
Japanese children is less by 2,257 than the number 
of wives. If each family had only one child, there- 
fore, there would be 2,257 families with no child. 
There are, however, reasons for believing as we 
shall soon see that the above figures, particularly 
with regard to children, are incomplete. 

The largest single group by occupation is that of 
farmers, there being 10,475 men, 5,594 wives, and 
4,594 children, while farm laborers number 16,391, 
their wives 1,401, and their children 976. 

Efforts have been made to secure statistics as to 
the number of Japanese children in the schools of 
California. The reply from the office of the super- 
intendent of public instruction states that "Chinese 
and Japanese children are admitted to the Cali- 
fornia schools upon exactly the same terms as other 
children and no reports are made as to the national- 
ity of the children in the schools." 

According to the report (1916) of the California 
State Board of Health Bureau of Vital Statistics, 
Japanese children born in California, so far as regis- 
tered, numbered for the successive years since 
1906 as follows: 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 175 

1906 134 

1907 221 

1908 455 

1909 682 

1910 719 

1911 995 

1912 1,467 

1913 2,215 

1914 2,874 

1915 3,342 

1916 3,721 

Total 16,825 

The number of Japanese children under fourteen 
years of age admitted to the United States (1909- 
1916), including Hawaii, was 3,044, and the de- 
partures to Japan for the same period was 1,590. 
According to the census of 1910 the number of 
children fifteen years of age and under in Conti- 
nental United States was 4,972. From these vari- 
ous data, which have, however, made no allowances 
for deaths, it is clear that there are now on the 
Pacific coast more than 20,000 Japanese youth and 
children. 

Since 1897 records have been kept of the occupa- 
tions of immigrants and emigrants of the different 
races. A summary of the statistics for Japanese 
discloses the following facts: 

The total number of immigrants classified as 
"professional" (1897-1916) is 5,587 and of "skiUed" 
is 8,226. The number of immigrant "farm labor- 
ers" was 76,925, of "farmers" 19,724, of ordinary 



176 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

"laborers" 12,935; and of "merchants'' 10,729. No 
classified records for the whole period of those de- 
parting are available. 

Between 1909 and 1916 classification of occupa- 
tion of emigrant departures as well as of immigrant 
arrivals are given. 

JAPANESE ARRIVALS OF IMMIGRANTS AND DEPAR- 
TURES OF EMIGRANTS BY OCCUPATION (1909-1916) 





Arrivals 


Depabtubes 


Professional 


2,312 

1,288 

47,783 


4,545 
643 . 

12,466 


Skilled 


Miscellaneous (including women 
and children) 


Total 


51,383 


17,654 





The reader must not be misled by these figures 
into thinking that the Japanese population in the 
United States has increased by 33,734, for this 
table deals only with immigrants and emigrants. 
No statistics of non-immigrants and non-emigrants 
by occupation are available. 

The distribution of the Japanese in the different 
sections of Continental United States is disclosed 
by the figures from the census given in the table on 
the opposite page. 

If Japanese in Alaska (913), the Hawaiian Islands 
(79,675), and elsewhere are included, we secure a 
total of 152,956 Japanese living within the United 
States and its possessions (not including the Philip- 
pines). 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 177 

The Commissioner of Immigration gives certain 
annual statistical reports dealing exclusively with 
Japanese and distinguishing between the Hawaiian 

DISTRIBUTION OP JAPANESE POPULATION 



Census 


1880 


1890 


1900 


1910 


Total United States.. 


148 


2,039 


24,326 


72,157 


New England 

Middle Atlantic 

East North Central . . 
West North Central . . 

South Atlantic 

East South Central. . . 
West South Central. . 
Mountain 


14 

27 

7 

1 

5 

5 

89 


45 

202 

101 

16 

55 

19 

42 

27 

1,532 


89 

446 

126 

223 

29 

7 

30 

5,107 

18,296 


272 

1,643 

482 

1,000 

156 

26 

428 

10,447 

57,703 


Pacific 





Islands and Continental United States. There are 
various classifications but there is no indication as 
to which are immigrants and which are non-immi- 
grants. These tables throw important light on the 
general character of the movement of Japanese to 
and from the United States. They begin with 1908. 
Since, however, the "gentlemen's agreement" be- 
came effective in 1909, we will confine our attention 
to the period 1909-1916. The material is rendered 
less valuable by reason of the fact that two different 
classifications by occupations are given, one prevail- 
ing for four years (1908-1911) and the other for five 
years (1912-1916). They differ so much that it is 
impossible to combine their details for the entire 
period. In the first period the division is between 



178 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

laborers and non-laborers, in the second period be- 
tween "professional," "skilled," "miscellaneous," 
and others without occupation. 

We present first the general summary of arrivals 
and departures. 

JAPANESE ARRIVING AND DEPARTING BY 
OCCUPATION (1909-1916) 





Continental U. S. 


Hawaii 


Arriving 


Depart- 
ing 


Arriving 


Depart- 
ing 


1909-1911 

Non-laborers 

Laborers 


7,162 
2,150 


8,796 
7,101 


934 
4,245 


2,477 
4,720 


Total 


9,312 


15,897 


5,179 


7,197 




1912-1916 
Professional 


1,929 

1,967 

20,800 

14,024 


1,511 

1,802 
23,153 

3,807 


1,160 

532 

15,119 

2,690 


345 

424 

10,024 

2,212 


Skilled 


Miscellaneous 

No Occupation (wo- 
men and children). . 

Total 


38,720 
48,032 


30,273 
46,170 


19,501 
24,680 


13,005 
20,202 


Grand total . . . 



We note first a slight discrepancy between the 
totals given here and those given earlier in this 
chapter of arrivals and departures of immigrants 
and non-immigrants, emigrants and non-emigrants. 
The total of those here given of arrivals in Con- 
tinental United States and Hawaii is 72,712, and 
departures 66,372, giving an increase of population 
by 6,341. There the arrivals of immigrants and 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 179 

non-immigrants are given as 73,457, the departures 
as 66,605, making the increase of population 6,852, 
a difference of 511. No means are given for check- 
ing this discrepancy. 

Note: The multitudinous statistical tables given by the Bureau 
of Immigration in its annual reports are remarkably correct and 
tally well with each other as a rule. Yet occasional slips occur. 
The totals of arrivals of Japanese in Continental U. S. and in Hawaii 
for the years 1913, 14, 15, and 16 agree as given in Table IV and in 
Tables E and F of the Immigration Bureau reports; but they do 
not agree for the years 1909, 10, 11, and 12. In these four years 
573 more Japanese were admitted according to Table IV than 
according to Tables E and F of the report. To take a single year for 
example, consider 1912. On p. 70 of the report for that year (Table 
IV) the total admission of Japanese immigrants and non-immigrants 
is given at 8,574. 

According, however, to Tables E and F (pp. 161 and 162) the total 
arrivals were 8,589 (males, 4,261; females, 4,328), a discrepancy by 
excess of 15. 

But if we refer to Tables VII and XIII of the bureau's reports 
(pp. 74 and 118) for that year we find that 4,231 males and 4,515 fe- 
males were admitted, a total of 8,746. The discrepancy between 
these two tables {E and F compared with VII and XIII) is 157. If 
totals from Table IV (8,574) are compared with totals from Tables 
VII and XIII (8,746) the discrepancy is 172. 

The result of this comparison of tables for the year 1912 is to show 
that they may not be accepted as exact. The same applies for the 
years 1909, 10, and 11. Further effort to show the discrepancies will 
hardly be worth while. 

According to the table before us the increase of 
population in Continental United States by arrivals 
over departures was 1,862, while the increase in the 
Hawaiian Islands was 4,478. 

According to the classification used between 1908- 
1911 "farmers" and hotel and restaurant keepers 
are classed among "non-laborers." On the basis 
of this classification while 12,665 non-laborers en- 
tered and 11,529 departed from Continental United 



180 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

States, 6,191 laborers entered and 9,164 departed. 
In the Hawaiian Islands, on the other hand, more 
"laborers" entered than departed, the respective 
figures being 9,946 and 8,248. 

For the period 1912-1916 the classification dis- 
tinguished between professional, skilled, miscel- 
laneous, and others without occupation including 
women and children. Of the two former classes, 
more entered both divisions than departed, but in 
the case of the miscellaneous, which consists largely 
of "laborers," more left Continental United States 
than arrived (23,153 to 20,800), while in the Hawaiian 
Islands more entered than departed (15,119 to 
10,024). The difference is particularly marked in 
regard to the arrivals and departures of farmers, 
farm laborers, and laborers in Continental United 
States, their combined arrivals (1908-1916) amount- 
ing to 16,613, while their combined departures for 
the same period amounted to 25,066, a diminution, 
therefore, of 8,453. In the Hawaiian Islands, on the 
contrary, the situation is quite reversed. There 
are no farmers there to speak of. Between 1908- 
1916 the total arrivals of farm laborers amounted 
to 23,100, while then* total departures amounted to 
17,436, showing an increase of 5,664. 

From these evidences we infer that the Japanese 
labor population in Continental United States is 
distinctly decreasing, while in the Hawaiian Islands 
it is distinctly increasing. 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 181 

Still another table is given in the successive annual 
reports of arrivals and departures showing the num- 
ber of appHcants for admission and of those ad- 
mitted, debarred, deported, and departed for the 
years 1909-1916. Their summary is herewith given. 

JAPANESE ADMITTED AND DEPARTED TO CONTI- 
NENTAL UNITED STATES AND HAWAII (1909-1916) 





United 
States 


Hawaii 


Total 


Applicants 


49,039 

48,032 

1,007 

899 

46,170 


25,262 

24,680 

580 

6 

20,202 


74,301 

72,712 

1,587 

905 

66,372 


Admitted 


Debarred 


Deported 


Departed 





Attention should be called to the distinction be- 
tween those debarred, deported, and departed. 
Those debarred have not been allowed to enter, 
while the deported refers to those who have entered 
and for one reason or another have been arrested 
and sent out of the country. Those deported are 
included in the statistics of those departed. A 
comparison of these figures with similar figures for 
the Chinese indicates that the latter suffer from a 
much more drastic treatment at the hands of ad- 
ministrative officials than do the Japanese. 

A compilation of all the figures given by the Im- 
migration Bureau as to immigration to and emigra- 
tion from Continental United States and Hawaii 
separately gives another important set of facts. 



182 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

We learn, for instance, that between 1909 and 1916 
there were admitted to Continental United States 
30,465 immigrants, while only 11,304 emigrants 
departed, making an apparent gain in population 
of 19,161 instead of 1,868, as shown above. This 
illustrates once more the fallacy of trying to balance 
immigrants and emigrants. Emigrants who leave 
for good come largely from non-immigrants who 
come to the United States for only a temporary 
visit, while immigrants come for a permanent stay. 
The bureau does not give the statistics similarly 
classified of non-immigrants and non-emigrants, 
distinguishing between Continental United States 
and Hawaii. The figures for immigration to and 
emigration from Hawaii are 20,918 and 4,960 re- 
spectively, giving an apparent increase of popula- 
tion of nearly 16,000, whereas the real increase for 
this period, as has already been shown, was 4,479. 

Special statistics are given by the bureau showing 
various details bearing on the "gentlemen's agree- 
ment," and distinguishing between Continental 
United States and Hawaii. From summaries of 
these statistics we derive the following facts: 

The total admissions of Japanese of all classes 
to Continental United States between 1909 and 1916 
were 48,333, of whom 19,874 were male non-laborers, 
16,747 were female non-laborers, 9,315 were male 
laborers, and 2,397 were female laborers. 

Of the 48,333, 18,966 were classed as "former 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 183 

residents"; that is to say, those who had already- 
been in the United States before; of these, 10,137 
were male non-laborers (1,393 females) and 7,146 
were male laborers (190 females). 

Of the 48,333, moreover, 21,789 were either parents 
(289), wives (15,885), or children (5,615) of former 
residents. Of the females, 14,867 belonged to the 
"non-laboring" class, while 1,962 were classed as 
"laborers." 

Those recorded as wives without other occupa- 
tion numbered 13,918 for the period 1911-1916, the 
record reaching no further back. 

An interesting distinction is drawn between former 
residents who had been in the United States prior 
to January 1, 1907, and those who had been here 
after that date. A compilation of those figures 
shows that between the years 1909-1916 of the 19,- 
697 admitted as former residents, only 762 had re- 
sided in the United States before 1907, while 18,- 
935 had resided here since 1907. This shows that 
few of those who came to America before 1907 re- 
turn to the United States on leaving it, while those 
who do return have come here since the "gentle- 
men's agreement" went into effect. 

There is an astonishing apparent discrepancy 
between the two figures given for "former residence," 
the total according to one classification being as 
given above, 18,966, and the other 19,697. The 
explanation is that, whereas the former figure in- 



184 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

eludes only those who had proper passports, the 
latter includes also those who did not have proper 
passports. 

Similar tables with regard to the Hawaiian Islands 
give the following results: 

Total admissions (1909-1916) amounted to 24,760, 
of whom 3,243 were male non-laborers and 2,505 
were female non-laborers, while 7,101 were male 
laborers and 11,911 were female laborers. 

Of these 24,760, some 6,470 were classed as former 
residents, and 17,439 either as parents (889), wives 
(11,299), or children (5,251). Those recorded as 
wives, without other occupation (1911-1916), were 
only 876, while the number of children admitted 
during the same period was 1,322. 

Of those who were admitted as former residents 
2,251 had resided in the Hawaiian Islands prior to 
January 1, 1907, while 4,317 had resided there since 
1907, giving a total of 6,568. The difference be- 
tween the figures for former residents given in the 
preceding paragraph and in this is doubtless due to 
the fact that those in the former figure (6,470) were 
possessed of proper passports, while the latter fig- 
ure (6,568) includes some who did not have proper 
passports. 

In view of the fact that since 1906 practically no 
Japanese have been allowed to naturalize, the re- 
port of the census for 1910 (vol. I, p. 1070) in re- 
gard to the citizenship of Japanese twenty-one years 
of age and over is a distinct surprise. It appears 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 185 

that out of 56,638 Japanese of the specified age, 209 
are American-born citizens, while 420 have been 
naturaHzed, and 389 more have their first papers. 
The table shows how they are distributed in the dif- 
ferent parts of the country. 

The question is sometimes raised as to how 
many Japanese would become citizens were the op- 
portunity given them. Mr. K. K. Kawami dis- 
cussed the matter in 1907 {North American Review, 
vol. 185, p. 398). He estimated from the facts 
available that there were in December, 1906, about 
50,000 Japanese males in the United States. Of 
course all who are here only temporarily would 
not desire citizenship, namely, government officials, 
students, day-laborers, domestics, etc. Those likely 
to desire citizenship would be those professional 
men, merchants, and farmers who are here for per- 
manency. But many even of them would not de- 
sire it. Many who desired it, moreover, would not 
be able to qualify for lack of adequate mastery of 
English. He came to the conclusion that perhaps 
3,000, or about 6 per cent, of the men then in the 
United States would be able to secure it. 

Since that date the number of settled families 
has largely increased, being roughly between 20,000 
and 25,000. Their degree of literacy has been con- 
stantly rising and also their economic status. No 
available statistics show what the occupations of 
the married men are. Very few of those who are not 
married will be likely to seek citizenship. 



186 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

Taking the various factors into consideration, the 
conclusion which I have reached is that those who 
are likely to desire and who have the capacity to 
secure naturalization would be hardly more than 
one-third of the men having families in America. 
But this question will be considered more at length 
in the next chapter. 

Statistics of Japanese in the United States do not 
include those in the Philippine Islands. While it is 
no part of our purpose to consider the Japanese and 
Chinese situation there, in view of wild assertions 
often made of Japanese ambitions and sinister plans 
in regard to those islands and of the large numbers 
already there, the following figures received from the 
Department of War are enlightening. 



Fiscal Year 


Arrivals 


Departures 


1904 


2,770 

1,167 

277 

374 

381 

321 

552 

795 

632 

2,163 

1,219 

983 

1,574 


284 
827 
371 
273 
266 
269 
108 
160 
172 
824 
626 
724 
771 


1905 


1906 


1907 


1908 


1909 


1910 


1911 


1912 


1913 (18 months) 


1914 


1915 


1916 


Totals 


13,208 
5,675 


5,675 


Balance remaining .... 


7,533 



JAPANESE IN THE UNITED STATES 187 

The first census in the Philippines was taken in 
1903, at which time there were 921 Japanese re- 
corded. The total Japanese population, therefore, 
of those islands in 1916 was 8,454. This reckoning 
takes no account of births and deaths. 



CHAPTER XII 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 



In order to appreciate the real Japanese situation 
on the Pacific coast the reader should not only know 
the facts in regard to the number of arrivals, de- 
partures, literacy, sex proportions, marital condi- 
tions, and similar matters as given in the preceding 
chapter, but also their financial status, their pro- 
portions to other peoples, and particularly the 
readiness and success with which they adapt them- 
selves to American life. An entire volume might 
well be given to a presentation of these facts. 

We begin this study with a comparative table 
that throws much light on many questions concern- 
ing the economic situation. 

JAPANESE FARMERS IN CALIFORNIA » 



Population 

Population in cities 

Population on farms 

Farmers 

Landowners 

Tenant farmers 

Total acreage of farms 

Average acres for one farmer . 
Value of properties of farmers . 

Average value per farmer 

Aggregated farm products . . . . 
Average for one farmer 



Totals 



2,377,549 

1,328,057 

1,049,492 

88,197 

66,632 

18,148 

27,958,894 

317 

1,614,694,584 

$18,308 

$355,710,389 

$3,806 



Japanese 



63,761 

26,231 

37,530 

7,495 

1,093 

6,402 

300,470 

40 

$15,053,000 

$2,008 

$33,079,160 

$4,414 



Peh 

Cent 



2.7 
2.0 
3.6 
8.4 
1.6 

35.2 
1.1 

12.0 
0.93 

11.0 

9.0 

110.0 



* Taken from the report of the Dendo Dan, 1916. 
188 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 189 



FARM PRODUCTS CLASSIFIED 



Fruits 

Grapes 

Vegetables 

Potatoes 

Berries 

Beans 

Sugar-beets 

Cereals and hay 

Onions 

Asparagus 

Seeds 

Flowers and plants, etc, 

Hops 

Rice 

Dairy and poultry. . . . 



Totals 



$87,750,000 

30,500,000 

25,850,000 

10,600,000 

1,789,314 

10,000,000 

14,000,000 

81,100,000 

2,960,000 

3,100,000 

2,500,000 

3,601,000 

4,000,000 

800,000 

53,369,389 



Japanese 



$3,801,540 

2,303,576 

9,685,145 

1,708,065 

1,652,000 

1,353,040 

1,615,510 

1,058,006 

974,855 

1,428,750 

530,850 

418,200 

290,500 

300,000 

700,000 



Particular attention is drawn to the following 
facts disclosed in the foregoing table. While the 
Japanese in California constitute 2.7 per cent of 
the total population, a clear majority lives and works 
in the country. Of landowners Japanese constitute 
only 1.6 per cent, while of tenant farmers they con- 
stitute 35.2 per cent. The average value of the 
property owned by one farmer in California is 
$18,308, while that of the Japanese farmer is only 
$2,008. On the other hand, while the value of the 
average production of one farmer is $3,806, that of 
the Japanese farmer is $4,414. 

It may be worth noting in this connection that 
besides Japanese and Americans engaged in farming 
there are representatives of many other races also. 



190 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

such as Chinese; Mexicans, Armenians, Syrians, and 
others. 

In regard to the crops, Japanese produce a large 
proportion of the vegetables ($9,685,145 out of a 
total of $25,850,000 worth), raise almost the entire 
berry crop ($1,652,000 out of $1,789,314), and pro- 
duce $1,428,750 worth of asparagus out of a total of 
$3,100,000 worth. 

The above table shows also those crops in the pro- 
duction of which Japanese take only a slight part, 
such as fruits, grapes, cereals, dairy and poultry 
products. Evidently, in spite of their relatively 
small population, Japanese are making a contribu- 
tion of high value to the economic prosperity of 
California, 

We are, however, primarily interested in the ques- 
tion of Japanese social adaptation to environment. 
What are the principles and also what are the facts ? 

The fundamental principles that control the 
Americanization of aliens from Europe hold also in 
the case of Asiatics. The matter is one of education. 
It is, indeed, more difficult for a Japanese or Chi- 
nese to master English than for a German or a 
Frenchman, and the process, therefore, of American- 
ization so far as the intellectual elements are con- 
cerned is correspondingly more difficult for an 
Asiatic than for most Europeans. On the other 
hand, it has been found that Japanese are especially 
diligent in learning English, many of them surpass- 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 191 

ing in their attainments many of the immigrants 
from Europe. Their natural handicap is in many- 
cases more than overcome by their diligence and zeal. 
The acquirement, however, of the emotional 
factor in Americanization has been peculiarly diffi- 
cult for Asiatics. Many elements have combined 
in producing this,situation, some of them due to the 
social inheritance of the Asiatics themselves; others 
due to the economic, personal, legislative, and social 
treatment they have received here. These elements 
have conspired to prevent the rise of those feelings 
of harmony, sympathy, and unity of the Asiatic 
alien with the American community and the nation 
which are essential to loyalty and to patriotism. 

In spite, nevertheless, of intellectual, emotional, 
and even legal obstacles, the processes of American- 
ization have been going on among Asiatics in Amer- 
ica. These facts of actual experience should be 
widely known, for they throw highly important light 
on the problems we are studying in this volume. 

Let us first consider what has actually been taking 
place among thousands of Japanese adults. 

The argument commonly urged is that Japanese 
not only do not wish to become American citizens, 
but that they could not do so even if for selfish or 
economic reasons they might wish to. For a Japa- 
nese, it is urged, is so devotedly loyal to his Emperor, 
whom he venerates and even worships, that it is not 
conceivable that he could desire to give up that 



192 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

loyalty. That this idea is widely accepted is due 
not only to American writers but also to Japanese. 
Japanese loyalty is indeed world-famed. It has 
been idealized by brilliant writers in such terms as 
to leave the impression that it is unique, sui generis, 
the like of which is to be found in no other land. 
Japanese patriotism is often conceived as a biological 
trait. It is regarded as inherited by birth, predeter- 
mined for each person by his heredity as is the slant 
of his eye and the color of his hair. It is, therefore, 
so they argue, biologically as well as psychologically 
impossible for a Japanese to abandon his loyalty to 
Japan and become in reality a loyal American. 

That this view should be widely held is by no 
means strange, for many facts seem to support it. 
It is, nevertheless, an error. It is due in part to 
insufficient knowledge and in part to faulty theories 
of biology and psychology. Patriotism is, as can 
be abundantly shown, a postnatal, intellectual- 
emotional affair; it is in no sense whatsoever a 
matter of biogenics. The assertion, therefore, that 
no Japanese could possibly desire to expatriate 
himself and become a citizen of an alien land is 
faulty in theory and as we shall soon see refuted 
by facts. 

When Japanese laborers first came to the United 
States, they of course did not come as immigrants 
with wives and children, planning to settle perma- 
nently in the new land. They came rather as ad- 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 193 

venturers, to earn money in a land where labor is 
scarce and wages high. They had no knowledge 
of the English language, nor of American customs. 
They followed the laws of demand and supply in 
the labor market; they worked in the fields, on the 
railroads, in the laundries, as cooks and servants, 
and wherever they could earn good wages. Being all 
young men, free adventurers, they roved from place 
to place, without sense of responsibility. They 
came to America with the definite expectation of 
returning sooner or later to their native homes with 
accumulated wealth. Frequent clash with em- 
ployers, some of whom they found unreasonable, and 
others at their mercy, was a natural result of these 
conditions. Contracts were broken, strikes were 
sprung on employers, obligations were ignored, and 
many an unfair advantage taken by Japanese labor 
bosses and gangs. Immoral conditions, moreover, 
could not fail to develop. 

And yet these undoubtedly true statements de- 
rogatory to Japanese should not be made without 
also pointing out the fact that white employers not 
infrequently took advantage of the Japanese; ex- 
orbitant prices were often charged for leases and for 
land; Japanese were tricked in horse trades; con- 
tracts outrageously unfair were frequently presented 
which the trustful Japanese, who could not read nor 
understand, would, nevertheless, sign. The stories 
told by Americans of Japanese wrong-doing are well 



194 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

matched by the stories of American wrong-doing 
told by Japanese. It is probably impossible to 
strike a balance. But it is not necessary. Both 
sides were at fault and had much to learn. 

But we should now add with great emphasis that 
on both sides there were many honorable men who 
sought to deal justly and honestly with each other. 
Without question there were real difficulties, due to 
differences of race, of language, and of customs. 
Each side, without intention of wrong, often did 
things in perfect innocence that appeared over- 
reaching and deceitful to the other. The rascals 
were doubtless a minority. There were, however, 
enough scamps on both sides of the race fence to 
create a situation of great irritation and of real 
difficulty, each side having no small amount of fact 
and right in its statement of grievances. 

Under these conditions it was inevitable that 
anti- Japanese feeling and agitation should develop. 
Reasons for it, some good and some bad, would 
be assigned. A common charge has been that Japa- 
nese are "undesirable," that they do not come as 
immigrants with wives and children to settle down, 
lead responsible lives, and become regular Americans 
as do immigrants from Europe. Another charge 
widely urged has been that Japanese are "non- 
assimilable." Among intelligent and responsible 
Americans grave doubts began to arise as to what 
might happen. All agreed that Japanese immigra- 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 195 

tion should in some way be stopped. Serious con- 
sideration was being given by Americans to the 
needful legislation when, to the satisfaction of all 
concerned, an offer was made by the Japanese Gov- 
ernment (1907) known as the "gentlemen's agree- 
ment." By it Japan, recognizing the real difficulty 
that was arising in California, agreed to stop her 
labor immigration to the United States. The sta- 
tistics already presented show how that immigra- 
tion had been growing apace, and how effectively 
it has been restrained by the faithful administra- 
tion of the "gentlemen's agreement" on the part of 
the Japanese Government, without any legislation 
on our part. 

A new period, therefore, in American- Japanese 
relations began in 1909. Relatively few new Japa- 
nese have come to enter into competition with 
Americans. As has been shown with much detail, 
many have in this period returned to Japan. The 
new conditions have brought important changes in 
the mutual attitude of Japanese and Americans. 
They have been learning important lessons in mutual 
adjustment and co-operation. The strain of in- 
creasing difficulties has passed. 

We are concerned in this chapter, however, par- 
ticularly with that which the Japanese have been 
learning. Many thousands of them have been here 
ten or twelve years. When the tide of Japanese 
immigration stopped, the scale of wages paid to 



196 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

Japanese began to rise until now they earn prac- 
tically the same as white men. In some kinds of 
work for which they are particularly fitted they 
actually earn more than white men. 

With their lengthening stay, moreover, they are 
losing their early dreams of making a fortune in a 
few years. They are learning that they must work 
long and hard, diligently and honorably, if they are 
really to succeed. This has led to a rather important 
sifting out of the reckless, the improvident, the im- 
pulsive, and the irresponsible; these classes have 
been returning steadily to Japan, while the more 
faithful, successful, and responsible ones are holding 
on. 

Many thousands, moreover, who have acquired 
property and a bank-account have, during the past 
few years, returned to their native land for a 
visit. Before coming to America they had Hved, 
not only on a lowly scale of life, but under conditions 
of severe social as well as political pressure. The 
family system, the police surveillance, the heavy 
taxation, their treatment as inferiors by fellow Japa- 
nese of higher social rank, and their exceedingly 
limited economic opportunity — these early experi- 
ences vividly recalled and somewhat experienced 
on their return to Japan, all in such contrast with 
their years of freedom, opportunity, and fairly equal 
treatment in the United States, soon produced in 
the breasts of many a revulsion against life and con- 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 197 

ditions in Japan and growing appreciation of 
America and its customs, ideals, and government. 
In a word, quite unconsciously to themselves a proc- 
ess of Americanization had been going on during 
their years of American life the results of which first 
came clearly to consciousness on their return to 
Japan. 

These considerations and influences have led 
thousands to the determination to make America 
their permanent home and the home of their chil- 
dren. On returning to America they have brought 
their wives and children with them, if they were 
already married, or have sent for them as soon as 
they could arrange for it after reaching America. 
If they were not married they either married and 
took their brides with them to America or, after 
returning to the United States, they soon sent for a 
wife selected by the parents. This new attitude 
and spirit has taken hold also of thousands not so 
well off. Though unable to return to Japan for a 
visit, they have decided to settle down permanently 
in America. They too have made arrangements for 
the coming of young women to be their wives. As 
this is done with the aid of photographs, the securing 
of wives in this way is often called the "picture- 
bride" movement. 

This change of mind has profoundly transformed 
both the spirit and the character of large numbers 
of Japanese in America as well as that of those now 



198 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

coming here. They are here for relatively perma- 
nent residence. They now desire to become thor- 
oughly adapted to their new life and opportunities. 
Many are studying English zealously. 

There are already, as we have shown, many thou- 
sand Japanese families. Already many thousand 
Japanese children are beginning to attend Ameri- 
can schools in every section of the Pacific coast. 
Japanese men by marrying and rearing families have 
"given hostages to fortune." It makes them more 
responsible; they must settle down and accumulate 
property. 

A better understanding, moreover, is developing 
in the mutual relations of American and Japanese 
labor. Not a few events have happened in Cali- 
fornia during the past three years that indicate these 
changes in attitude. For many years the relations 
between the American and Japanese restaurants and 
waiters were far from pleasant. As the result, how- 
ever, of much quiet work the following amazing thing 
happened. When the union waiters went out on 
strike (August, 1916), all the Japanese waiters did 
the same, although they were not members of the 
union. And, still more surprising, the restaurants 
were unable to employ any Japanese as strike-break- 
ers! This loyalty of the Japanese has overcome 
many misunderstandings and animosities, and has 
started a new spirit in the relations of organized 
labor to Japanese labor. 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 199 

Another fact. Mr. Scharrenberg, secretary of the 
California State Federation of Labor, stated (Sep- 
tember, 1916) in the San Francisco Central Labor 
Council that he felt that the time had come for a 
more liberal attitude toward the Japanese and sug- 
gested that the time might soon come when they 
would be received into the unions. 

The causes for this improvement may be suggested 
in a few words. First of all, Japanese themselves 
are learning American ways and the English lan- 
guage, as we have already noted above. Then, 
many excellent people in California, both Americans 
and Japanese, have been exerting themselves in many 
little yet effective ways to correct the mistakes and 
misunderstandings of the past. We must also men- 
tion the splendid way in which Japan did her part 
to make the Panama Pacific Exposition successful, 
that spared neither effort nor expense, and that 
effectually introduced Japan to multitudes of Cali- 
fornians who had had no conception of Japan's real 
place among the civilized nations. 

But what is perhaps the most important factor 
making for understanding and more friendly rela- 
tions between American and Japanese labor was the 
coming to this country in the summer of 1915 of 
two Japanese labor delegates, Messrs. Suzuki and 
Yoshimatsu. The first suggestion for an exchange 
of fraternal delegates by American and Japanese 
labor was made to the writer in November, 1914, by 



200 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

Mr. Scharrenberg. The suggestion was taken to 
Japan by the writer early in 1915, and the delegates 
arrived in San Francisco in July of that year. They 
were accepted and seated by the California State 
Federation of Labor, and were given opportunity to 
speak in many Central Labor Councils throughout 
the State. 

They also attended the Convention of the Ameri- 
can Federation of Labor held that year in San 
Francisco (November, 1915). At that time Mr. 
Shima gave a dinner at which the two delegates 
from Japan, with President Gompers and Secretary 
Scharrenberg, were the special guests of honor — the 
first time that the official leaders of American and 
Japanese labor had ever sat down to a common meal 
and exchanged friendly greetings. It was on that 
occasion that one of the leaders of organized labor in 
San Francisco, Mr. McArthur, made the humorous 
but significant remark to Mr. Suzuki: "The more 
I see of you the less you look like a Jap." 

The results of that four months' adventure of 
Japanese labor delegates in California were so satis- 
factory that the following year (September, 1916) 
Mr. Suzuki came again, this time attending also 
the annual convention of the American Federation 
of Labor held at Baltimore. He brought with him 
from Japan invitations to Secretary Scharrenberg 
and President Gompers to visit Japan as fraternal 
delegates ! The letters which he brought are of his- 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 201 

toric interest because of the fact that they were the 
first official communications of Japanese labor to 
American labor, and also because of their remark- 
able contents. It is a misfortune that they have not 
received more public attention. On account of the 
war, it is natural that neither of these invitations 
could be accepted. It is to be hoped, however, that 
in due time both Mr. Scharrenberg and President 
Gompers wiU visit Japan as fraternal delegates from 
the national and State organizations of the Ameri- 
can Federation of Labor to the labor of Japan both 
imorganized and organized. 

Particularly effective evidence of improving re- 
lations were the four resolutions offered by as many 
different labor unions at the California State Federa- 
tion annual convention (October, 1916) proposing 
to authorize the organization of Japanese in the 
unions. The resolutions were referred to the execu- 
tive committee for full consideration. 

Mr. Suzuki's welcome at the annual convention 
of the American Federation of Labor held at Balti- 
more, in November, 1916, was also a notable event. 
His address was repeatedly interrupted by applause. 
Mr. Scharrenberg raised the money for a memento 
presented to Mr. Suzuki on behaK of the Federation 
by President Gompers. It was a diamond-studded 
gold watch-fob with a suitable inscription. 

Mr. Suzuki also attended as a fraternal delegate 
the annual meeting of the International Seamen's 



202 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

Union of America, and was presented with a hand- 
some gold medal. 

On December 17, 1916, the Nm) York Tribune 
devoted a full page in large type to a description of 
Mr. Suzuki and his work. His photograph was en- 
titled, "The Gompers of Japan," while that of 
President Gompers was entitled, "The Suzuki of 
America," and between them was a composite 
photograph of the two, a man handsomer, brainier, 
and more forceful than either ! 

"I used to think that danger might sometime 
threaten us from across the Pacific, but since meeting 
the fraternal delegates from Japan to the American 
Federation of Labor I am convinced that the workers 
of Japan do not want war with us any more than 
the workers of America want war with them." 

These are words of great significance, seeing that 
they were spoken in San Francisco (September, 
1916) by Mr. Scharrenberg, secretary of the Cali- 
fornia State Federation of Labor, before an audience 
of more than 4,000 who cheered him heartily. 

A sign of the new situation perhaps as significant 
as any is the fact that the "Legislative Programme" 
of the California State Federation of Labor for the 
winter (1916-1917), for the first time in many years 
made no reference whatever to Asiatic problems. 
This, of course, is not to be interpreted as showing 
any diminution in their opposition to free immigra- 
tion, but only as indicating a better understanding 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 203 

of the effects of the "gentlemen's agreement" and a 
better attitude toward Japanese now in the country. 

Still another evidence of the new Spirit arising in 
California may be found in connection with the use 
of the public tennis-courts in Oakland. If Japa- 
nese presumed to hold a court when Americans 
wanted it; difficulty was sure to arise, harsh words 
and looks would be hurled at them, and occasionally 
even stone-throwing was resorted to. This was the 
situation five years ago. According to my inform- 
ant, that situation has quite thoroughly changed. 
Japanese tennis-players now enjoy the same op- 
portunity and treatment as others. Though only a 
straw, it tells an important story of change in the 
popular attitude. 

During the summer and autumn of 1917 several 
Japanese missions, embassies, and committees came 
to the United States. It seems that the parliamen- 
tary mission, of which Doctor T. Masao was chief, 
felt some anxiety before reaching California as to how 
they would be received and treated, particularly in 
California. The experiences of Japanese in former 
years in California still reverberate in Japan. Even 
eminent visitors from Japan have on occasion been 
subjected to insult and humiliation. 

This parliamentary mission, however, much to 
their satisfaction, received nothing but the most 
cordial treatment wherever they went. In no city 
of the United States was their reception more friendly 



204 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

than in San Francisco. While a suitable welcome 
was to have been expected from State and city oflS- 
cials, and from the Chamber of Commerce of San 
FranciscO; the representatives of organized labor 
were hardly expected to show the same manifesta- 
tions of cordial good-will. Such, however, was the 
case. 

Mr. George Shima, popularly known as the Japa- 
nese "Potato King/' gave a dinner to the mission, 
which several representatives of organized labor 
also attended. According to the statement of 
Doctor Masao, the frank conference which there 
took place in regard to Japanese labor in California 
and in Japan, and as to methods for meeting such 
difficulties as still remain in the economic competi- 
tion of Japanese with American labor, was exceed- 
ingly satisfactory to all concerned. At that con- 
ference Mr. Murphy, president of the California 
State Federation of Labor, was present and also 
Mr. Scharrenberg, its secretary-treasurer, " the man 
behind the throne." 

So cordial were the relations established, that an 
official letter of introduction for the entire mission 
to Mr. Samuel Gompers, president of the American 
Federation of Labor, and the other officers at Wash- 
ington, was given them by Mr. Scharrenberg on 
behalf of the California State Federation. 

On their arrival in Washington, the executive 
council of the American Federation of Labor was 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 205 

in session. President Gompers took the opportunity 
to introduce the entire parHamentary mission to 
the entire executive council, on which occasion 
agaiQ frank and friendly addresses were made on 
both sides, and further progress was attained in 
mutual understanding and good-will. 

Members of the special war mission from Japan, 
of which Viscount Ishi was head, also reported the 
same unexpectedly cordial and delightful welcome 
on their arrival at San Francisco. 

These encouraging signs of a better attitude, how- 
ever, should not make Americans feel that all prob- 
lems have been solved. Not until immigration and 
naturalization laws are placed on a universal basis, 
free from humiliating race discrimination, shall we 
reach a fundamental solution of the problem of our 
relations with Japan and China. 

Of the Japanese now in America, however, how 
many would become American citizens were the 
opportunity given them? Some Americans assume 
that all would do so immediately, and, as "they 
would surely vote in a solid body and for their own 
race interests, the evils of giving them the suffrage 
would be serious," they argue. 

This matter has received attention on each of 
my visits to the Pacific coast. My conclusions are 
about as follows: There are in Continental United 



206 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

States, roughly speaking, about 35,000 women and 
young children. Of the men, only those who have 
considerable education, who have acquired property 
and families and have definitely made up their 
minds to stay permanently here would desire to 
secure citizenship; in other words, only those who 
have something at stake and occupy positions of 
responsibility. 

Of those who would desire citizenship quite a pro- 
portion would probably be unable to secure it be- 
cause of insufficient mastery of the English language. 
This would apply particularly to the women. It is 
not a difficult matter to get a smattering of English; 
but for a Japanese to get enough to read readily 
the daily paper and to converse freely with Ameri- 
cans, is a matter of great difficulty, which only a 
small proportion of the Japanese in America could 
accomplish. If out of the 60,000 Japanese men in 
Continental United States more than 10,000 would 
be able to qualify linguistically for citizenship 
within five years, it would be surprising. In con- 
sidering this matter it is to be remembered that of 
the Japanese in America tens of thousands have only 
limited education in their own language; they are 
not students, and do not have the habits of mind 
necessary for the mastery of English. 

The question will, of course, be raised by some 
whether or not Japanese who might qualify linguis- 
tically would make loyal Americans. Only experi- 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 207 

ence can confirm or disprove the suspicions and the 
assertions of critics. I may, however, record my 
beHef that Japanese and Chinese would make just 
as loyal American citizens as we receive from any 
other land. The Japanese would, I believe, rank 
especially high in matters of loyalty, since their 
moral education for centuries has been along the 
lines of loyalty. When once they have deliberately 
and legally severed their political obhgations to 
Japan and have openly declared their adoption of 
America as the object of loyalty, I believe that their 
loyalty would be genuine and effective. 

An illustration which Japanese themselves often 
use in discussing this matter is drawn from the 
political conditions of Old Japan when the country 
was divided into eighty-odd clans, each claiming the 
undivided loyalty of its people. The practical ques- 
tion not seldom arose as to the duty of a man who 
married into another clan; in case of war should he 
fight for the clan in which he was born, or for the 
clan into which he had married? The old moralists 
taught that, however his heart might shrink, it was 
his moral obligation to fight for the clan in which he 
was living and which had adopted him as one of its 
members. In this way he would prove to his adopted 
clan the noble quality of the manhood of the clan in 
which he was born. Similarly, they say, a Japanese 
who has been adopted into the national life of 
America by naturalization should and would be 



208 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

loyal to his new obligations, even if in so doing he 
should be compelled to fight against the land of his 
birth. 

This question has been frequently discussed in 
Japanese papers during the past six or eight years. 
For Japanese leaders of thought have come to realize 
that their earnest plea for equality of treatment for 
Japanese in America with that given to European 
immigrants cannot properly be heeded unless Japa- 
nese prove themselves capable of becoming true 
and loyal Americans, as do immigrants from other 
lands. 

Those who are ignorant of the facts often assert 
that the laws of Japan forbid expatriation. This 
is, however, a complete misunderstanding. The 
constitution of Japan, proclaimed in 1889, made pro- 
vision for it. Legislation, moreover, has been re- 
cently enacted (February, 1916) providing for the 
surrender of Japanese citizenship by Japanese chil- 
dren born abroad. By the American law, as we 
have already seen, children of aliens born in America 
are American citizens by the mere fact of birth here. 
This featm^e of the American law gives double citi- 
zenship to children of aliens of eveiy race if only 
they are born in America. Now Japan's recent law 
provides that Japanese children, by the act of their 
parents, or of their guardians', may declare their 
choice of American citizenship and may thereby for- 
swear their allegiance to Japan. 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 209 

On the morning of the very day when this law 
was enacted the report was pubKshed in the metro- 
pohtan papers of Tokyo of addresses made by 
Hawaiian-born Japanese young men in celebration 
of Washington's birthday, declaring their American 
citizenship and their obligations to the United 
States, which they would loyally perform, even at 
the cost of fighting against Japan if need should 
arise. The proposed law was, nevertheless, passed 
unanimously by the Upper House, noted for its 
conservatism. 

At the time of my visit to Japan with Doctor 
Shailer Mathews, representing the Federal Council 
of the Churches of Christ in America (February, 
1915), I made frequent inquiry of Japanese leaders 
whether or not the nation would regard with equa- 
nimity the expatriation of thousands of Japanese in 
America should the privileges of naturalization be 
given them. The unanimous reply was that a dec- 
ade ago such a proposal would have been received 
with storms of disapproval, but that Japan had come 
to see that if Japanese citizens with their families 
are going to remain permanently in foreign lands, 
in order to establish and maintain right relations 
with the people and government, naturalization in 
those lands with the surrender of Japanese citizen- 
ship would be essential and would not be resented. 
Doubtless there still remain some bigoted patriots 
in Japan who would regard expatriation as treason. 



210 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

but the number I was assured was small and con- 
stantly diminishing. 

In refutation of the notion that all Japanese are 
inevitably, necessarily, and eternally loyal to their 
Emperor, who is venerated and, some insist, is wor- 
shipped as deity, I may refer to the mortifying dis- 
covery of the police some eight years ago of a plot 
to assassinate the Emperor! Forty persons were 
implicated in the plot, of whom 24 were convicted, 
12 suffering capital punishment and 12 life im- 
prisonment. 

Some Japanese in America are very earnest in their 
desire for privileges of citizenship. Several thou- 
sand Japanese live east of the Rocky Mountains, 
most of whom have secured high-school and many of 
them college education in America. Not a few of 
them have married American wives and are rearing 
famines essentially American. Their years of life 
here have largely severed them from Japan. Were 
they to return to their native land they would find it 
diflScult to establish fresh and satisfactory relations 
with their kindred and their people, and many of 
them would find it difficult even to make a living. 
Now the sense of being "without a country" is 
highly unpleasant to any one and especially to a 
Japanese. Such Japanese desire accordingly to 
acquire American citizenship. I well remember a 
dinner of welcome given me recently by a score of 
Japanese in a large American city, about one-haK 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 211 

of them being permanent residents of that city. 
One of the subjects discussed in the after-dinner 
speeches was that of American citizenship. Of the 
speakers one was particularly vehement in his plea 
that I should explain the real reasons why America 
refuses citizenship to Japanese. With tears in his 
eyes he told of his life in America of more than a 
score of years. In education, in heart, in ideals, 
in business, and in family relations (his wife is an 
American and also his children) he was really and 
truly an American, yet it was impossible for him to 
take the legal step that is allowed to men of other 
races and become in the full and official sense an 
American and be recognized as such. 

If Americanization of Japanese has been taking 
place in spite of many artificial obstacles, what would 
the result be were wholesome conditions provided 
with educational facilities and assurance of wel- 
come and citizenship to those who qualify? Can 
there be any doubt? No small part of the difficulty 
has been created by those who have regarded the 
problem as racial rather than as economic and moral. 
Advantage has been taken of the fact that Japanese 
are refused privileges of citizenship to make them, 
in certain States, the butt of race agitation and legis- 
lation. This has of course increased the race feel- 
ing on both sides. Under such circumstances, is it 
strange if not many Japanese have developed en- 
thusiasm for America ? 



212 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

And is it not highly irrational to denounce Japa- 
nese for not developing American loyalty and pa- 
triotism when the conditions under which they live 
are so utterly unsuited for its development ? Should 
the conditions be changed and citizenship with all 
its privileges be granted to those who qualify re- 
gardless of race, the sentimental temperament of 
the Japanese would unquestionably respond to the 
new situation and an exuberance of patriotic Amer- 
icanism appear that would astonish pessimistic 
critics of Japanese character. 

Thus far our attention has been directed to the 
Americanization of adult Japanese. But we must 
consider the case also of the American-born Japa- 
nese children. It may be stated at once that their 
complete Americanization differs in no respect 
from the Americanization of children of other races. 
All turns upon the education they receive, not upon 
their biological heredity. Japanese children attend 
American schools and are taught by American teach- 
ers. They develop American ideas, speak the Eng- 
lish language, play with American children, and be- 
come just as thoroughly familiar with and controlled 
by American ideals as are the children of other races. 
Experience in these matters is only just beginning 
in California. In the Hawaiian Islands, however, 
the American education of Japanese children has 
been going on for some years; the results are now 
beginning to appear, which we shall consider in the 
following chapter. 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 213 

In the Americanization of American-born Japa- 
nese an important factor is of course the spirit and 
atmosphere of the Japanese home. If the treatment 
received by the parents makes them bitter toward 
America, it can hardly fail to interfere with the 
wholesome Ajnericanization of the children. It can 
hardly fail to disturb the emotional factor of the 
process. If Japanese children in America, though 
citizens by birth, are made to feel that their people 
are not given fair treatment, merely because they 
are Japanese, is there not danger that when they 
grow to adult life and become voters they may 
themselves become the objects of unfriendly treat- 
ment, develop resentment, and constitute a solid 
race group not fully Americanized nor properly in- 
corporated into our national life ? The danger, and 
also evil, of such a situation is self-evident. Who 
will be responsible for such an unfortunate condi- 
tion? 

Those who would refuse citizenship to Asiatics 
need to remember that it is impossible now to ex- 
clude from our land those Asiatics already here. 
They are here and they are here to stay. Their 
children are here and they have the right to vote 
as soon as they reach their twenty-first birthday. 
The problem, therefore, is this: Are we going to 
treat those Asiatics who are here in such ways as to 
diminish or in such ways as to increase the difficulties 
of the situation ? The question before us is not that 
of immigration, large or small, or none at all. The 



214 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

question is whether we are going to treat those 
whom we have already admitted, and shall in the 
future continue to admit, in such ways as to repel 
them and their children, setting them off as a group 
by themselves in perpetual alienation of spirit from 
our American life and government ? or are we going 
to give them that equality of political and economic 
right and opportunity as shall reduce the race aliena- 
tion and the race problem to a minimum? 

The contention of this volume is that the refusal 
of naturalization privileges to Asiatics, in spite of 
qualification in every non-racial respect, will inter- 
fere with the best Americanization of Asiatic chil- 
dren born in America and will tend to fasten per- 
manently upon us serious race problems. The 
surest and best method for avoiding the race problem 
of white and yellow in the United States is to restrict 
immigration rigidly and then to grant complete equality 
of political and economic privilege and opportunity to 
all who qualify in language and education. 

For an adequate understanding of the forces at 
work tending to Americanize the Japanese in Cali- 
fornia no one should overlook the evangelistic ac- 
tivities of Christian churches and the rise among 
the Japanese of Christian institutions. As soon as 
Japanese began to arrive in considerable numbers, 
missionary work for them was started both by 
churches in California and by mission boards. Much 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 215 

energy has been expended in this direction. Four 
American representatives of as many mission boards 
and many Japanese pastors and evangehsts are de- 
voting their mitiring energies to this work. 

The Japanese themselves have become enterpris- 
ing leaders. They have formed (1910) an Inter- 
denominational Board of Missions (Dendo Dan) 
and are carrying a programme of activities that is 
highly valuable and promising both from the 
evangelistic standpoint and from that of American- 
ization. From their sixth annual report the follow- 
ing figures are secured in regard to Christian work 
among Japanese in California. 

There are 78 churches connected with 15 de- 
nominations (23 Methodist, 11 Presbyterian, 10 
Congregational, 6 Protestant Episcopal, 5 Canadian 
Methodist, 4 Union, and 19 belonging to nine other 
denominations). The pastors and evangelists nima- 
ber 86, church-members 5,210, and Sunday-school 
attendants 2,591. The additions to church-member- 
ship during the year were 705. These churches 
maintained 34 schools for instruction in English, 
having 897 pupils. They also carried on 17 kinder- 
gartens, employing 25 teachers and attended by 
641 children. 

The Dendo Dan brings over from Japan from time 
to time eminent Japanese pastors and evangelists, 
or makes use of those who pass through California. 
In the winter of 1915-1916 it secured the services 



216 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

of one of the most eminent and successful Japanese 
Christians, Reverend Paul Kanamori. He held ser- 
vices in 56 churches on the Pacific coast, at which 
1,773 Japanese professed conversion. At the date 
of the report 614 of these had already joined the 
churches on confession of faith and 393 others were 
receiving instruction preparatory for membership. 

The full significance of these facts can only be 
appreciated by one who knows how different is the 
attitude and spirit of a Japanese who has become a 
Christian from the attitude and spirit of those who 
either have no religious convictions whatever, or 
still cling to their ancestral faith compounded of 
Shintoism and Buddhism with more or less of super- 
stition and magic. A Christian Japanese is ready 
to go more than half-way in establishing right re- 
lations with American neighbors. The difference is 
beautifully illustrated in the township of Livingston 
where a community of Christian Japanese has been 
built up and is living on the most friendly relations 
with Americans. No more important step could 
possibly be taken by American Christians in the 
Americanization of Orientals living here perma- 
nently than in providing adequate support for ag- 
gressive Christian work among these peoples from 
the Far East. 

Two interesting cases of Americanized Japanese 
children may be cited at this point. 

When the Anti-Alien Land Law was under hot 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 217 

discussion and danger of war was widely believed, 
even the children in the schools of Los Angeles got 
wind of the situation. One day a little Japanese 
boy of ten or twelve, on his return from school, 
was found in tears by his father. For some time 
the father tried in vain to find out the trouble; he 
surmised that the boy might have had some trouble 
with his white schoolmates. At last, however, the 
little fellow sobbed out the words: "Papa, you know 
there is going to be war between America and Japan 
and I'll have to fight you 'cause you're a Jap." 

The American-born daughter of a wealthy Japa- 
nese living in California one day suddenly exclaimed 
to her mother, after observing hers'elf intently in the 
mirror: "Why, mother, how much I look like a 
Japanese girl!" Playing as she had so exclusively 
with her American playmates, she had assumed that 
she looked like them. Only when she reached her 
twelfth year did she discover that she was Japanese 
in appearance. 

Particularly interesting cases of Americanization 
consist of Japanese children reared from infancy in 
American families. I am personally acquainted 
with two such cases, both girls. One of them, dis- 
covering her race when fourteen years of age, went 
through a season of deep spiritual rebellion. Physi- 
cally she was Japanese. Mentally and spiritually 
she was completely American even to the extent of 
having an anti-Japanese spirit ! The other I came 



218 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

to know only as a young lady after she had gradu- 
ated from Stanford University. She, too, was a 
thoroughly American woman in every respect save 
her physical features. Neither knows anything of 
the Japanese language, customs, ideals, or manners. 
They were and are as thoroughly American as any 
person of white ancestry. In both cases the bi- 
ological heredity was completely Japanese while the 
social heredity was completely American. 

With regard to the Americanization of Chinese 
in the United States the following statements will 
perhaps suffice. The census shows that in 1910 
there were 8,463 American-born Chinese citizens 
twenty-one years of age and over, and 1,368 more 
who were naturalized. How completely any of 
these were in any proper sense Americanized we have 
no means of knowing. Certain considerations, how- 
ever, in this connection may be helpful. 

Until 1912, when the Chinese Republic was 
established, the entire trend of Chinese thought 
throughout the world was conservative. Wherever 
they went they had no idea of adopting new ways. 
It did not occur to them that they should adapt 
themselves to the peoples among whom they might 
be living, that they should learn to be assimilated 
to their new surroundings. The same is true of 
Anglo-Saxons who go to other lands — it does not 
occur to them to adopt the ways, ideas, and manners 



SITUATION ON THE PACIFIC COAST 219 

of the people of those lands. But a new spirit has 
arisen within the republic. China is changing and 
all Chinese everywhere. They are entering into the 
life of the world. The queue is vanishing and all 
that it signifies. We now begin to see that Chinese 
can and do assimilate new ideas, and can be as- 
similated to new conditions. 

The permanent Chinese population of the United 
States, as we have seen, is small. The families are 
few, as is also the number of their children. 

The anti-Chinese feeling on the Pacific coast has 
largely, if not wholly, passed away. In place of 
violent denunciation so common two or three dec- 
ades ago, commendation of Chinese character and 
efficiency is now frequently heard. 

The writer was recently told by a labor leader in 
San Francisco that the Chinese voters of San Fran- 
cisco exercise their suffrage rights with discrimina- 
tion and probity. In the public schools of the 
Pacific coast Chinese children are securing their 
education side by side with the children of the 
other races that make up our mixed population. Of 
the 6,978 Chinese between the ages of six and 
twenty reported by the census of 1910, 3,263 were 
attending school. These changes of American opin- 
ion and attitude are doubtless due to the substantial 
attainments in Americanization of the Chinese in 
America, and also to an adjustment to the Chinese 
on the part of the Americans. 



CHAPTER XIII 
SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 

The Hawaiian Islands present a unique oppor- 
tunity for the study of race contacts and trans- 
formations; particularly contacts of the white and 
yellow races. The writer spent the early years of 
his life in Hawaii. In the course of his trips back 
and forth across the Pacific during the past thirty 
years he has made several visits to the islands. In 
1915 he visited fifteen plantations for the special 
purpose of studying the Japanese situation. The 
facts discovered were impressive. He prepared a 
paper which was later printed under the title "Ha- 
waii's American-Japanese Problem." That pam- 
phlet, together with governor's reports for 1915- 
1916, and the reports of the superintendent of 
public instruction and of the Chamber of Commerce 
of Honolulu for 1916, have been utilized in prepar- 
ing the present chapter. 

The native Hawaiian population, supposed to 
number some 400,000 when first discovered in the 
sixteenth century, early contracted fatal diseases 
from sailors and died off at an appalling rate. At 
the time of the arrival of the missionaries (1820) 

220 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 221 



already nearly one-half of the population had 
perished. The high death-rate was finally over- 
come, so that a small Hawaiian population survives 
to this day. Being a tropical people, they are un- 
fitted for the monotonous hard toil to which in- 
habitants of the temperate zones are accustomed. 

When, therefore, extensive cultivation of the soil 
became profitable and plantations developed, plant- 
ers began to look for more efficient labor than that 
supplied by the natives. It was soon discovered 
that American laborers could not be induced to 
migrate to the tropical islands for agricultural labor 
under the broiling sun. The planters, therefore, 
during the later decades of the last century expended 
large sums in bringing to the islands in successive 
waves laborers from China, Portugal, Japan, Porto 
Rico, Siberia, and the Philippines. As one supply 
failed, for one reason or another, a new source was 
tapped. In consequence there is found to-day in 
the Hawaiian Islands a highly mixed population. 
According to the latest available statistics (June 30, 
1916) the total estimated population of the islands 
is 228,771, classified as follows: 



1. Japanese 97,000 

2. Hawaiian 23,770 

3. Part Hawaiian . . 15,334 

4. Portuguese 23,755 

5. Chinese 21,954 

6. Filipinos 16,898 



[ American 1 

British I ^g ^.^ 

German ( " ' ' 
Russian J 

8. Porto Rican. . . . 5,187 

9. Spanish 3,577 

10. Others 5,254 



222 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

In addition to these members of the regular popu- 
lation Governor Pinkham reported 8,445 men and 
officers in the army and 407 in the navy and marine 
corps. 

In spite of serious danger throughout the last 
century from certain European nations, the islands 
maintained their political independence. The 
government in 1840 became a constitutional mon- 
archy, and in 1894 a republic. At the time of the 
Spanish-American War (1898), at the request of the 
Hawaiian Government itself, the islands were an- 
nexed by the United States and have since been 
administered as a Territory. All who had acquired 
citizenship in the island government were accepted 
as American citizens, whatever their race. Since 
1898 no Chinese have been allowed to be natural- 
ized. 

In spite of the small minority of Caucasians, 
only some 14,000 of whom are American and British, 
the authorized language of the islands is English — 
the one medium of communication between the 
races. The races have lived together with a re- 
markable spirit of good-will, mutual patience, and 
common effort to make a success of the experiment, 
into which they have unintentionally stumbled. 
They are seeking to show "how diverse races can 
live together without friction, in fair friendliness 
and mutual advantage." 

One of the fundamental reasons why the experi- 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 223 

ment has gone on successfully thus far is the spirit 
which had been planted by the missionaries among 
the native population prior to the advent of other 
races. Under the guidance of the missionaries 
who first reached the islands in 1820; not only did the 
Kings and princely families become Christians, but 
also a large proportion of the population. As early 
as 1825 the Ten Commandments were made by King 
Kamehameha the basal law of the land. Constitu- 
tional government was established in 1840, universal 
suffrage was granted in due time based on educa- 
tional and property qualifications, rights of land- 
ownership, formerly confined to the royal family, 
were given (1848) to heads of families with suit- 
able amounts of land, and the spirit of universal 
brotherhood was wide-spread among the people. As 
aliens of various races arrived, equal privileges were 
extended to all as they qualified, regardless of 
race. 

As the number of alien laborers has increased in 
recent decades, constant effort has been made by 
the leading plantations;, many of them under the 
control of descendants of missionaries, to main- 
tain right relations with them. "From the be- 
ginning, then," says Professor A. F. Griffiths in his 
valuable article on the " Japanese Race Question in 
Hawaii" {Journal of Race Development, April, 1916), 
"the causes which have made for jealousy, suspicion, 
and friction were largely removed. Thus the equal- 



224 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

ity of the races, fair dealing among men, a simple 
sense of the justice that ought to go out to the 
other man, were firmly established." 

When the "gentlemen's agreement" (1907) was 
entered upon by Japan, Japanese immigration to 
Hawaii was affected no less than that to Continental 
United States. The total of Japanese arrivals at 
Honolulu fell from 8,694 in 1908 to 1,493 in 1909. 
The statistics of Japanese arrivals to and departures 
from the Hawaiian Islands have been carefully 
considered in the latter part of Chapter XI. 

According to the census of 1910 the total number 
of males of all races in the Hawaiian Islands 
amounted to 123,099, of whom 54,784 were Japanese, 
many of whom, of course, were children. At that 
time the females of all races numbered 68,810, of 
whom 24,891 were Japanese. Since that date 
13,746 Japanese females have been admitted to the 
islands, and about 3,400 have departed. There 
has accordingly been an increase by immigration of 
about 10,000 females. Since the total Japanese 
population has increased by immigration by only 
about 3,000, this means that some 7,000 more men 
have departed from the islands than have entered. 
The disparity between the sexes has accordingly 
diminished, the adult males numbering approxi- 
mately 48,000 and the females 35,000, without mak- 
ing allowances for births and deaths. 

According to the territorial statistics, from 1887 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 225 

to 1894 (inclusive) some 1,338 Japanese children 
were born in Hawaii, of whom 600 were males and 
638 were females, while from 1895 to 1914 (inclusive) 
Japanese births reached the high figures of 22,247 
males and 20,352 females. For the years 1915- 
1916 the births of Japanese children were 4,606 and 
4,639 respectively, as reported by the Japanese 
consul. An important item to be considered at 
this point is the large number of Japanese children 
who have been sent back to Japan. Full statistics 
are not at hand. For the years 1915-1916, however, 
the figures as reported by Governor Pinkham are 
992 and 866 respectively.^ Making allowances for 
deaths, for which we have no statistics, and for 
returns to Japan, it is nevertheless evident that a 
very considerable Hawaiian-born Japanese popula- 
tion is growing up in the islands, who are by our 
laws American-born citizens. Their number must 
be somewhere between 25,000 and 30,000. Those 
between six and fifteen years of age who are in the 
schools number 14,440. As the years pass the males 
will be entitled to register and to vote. This statis- 
tical situation suggests many important questions. 
What kind of citizens, for instance, will these Japa- 
nese children make? Will this Hawaiian-born Japa- 

1 It is to be noted, however, that these figures differ extraordinarily 
from those given by the Bureau of Immigration; according to this 
latter authority the total departures of children fourteen years of 
age and under from the United States (including Hawaii) for 1915 
and 1916 were respectively 135 and 137. How to reconcile the 
governor's figures with those of the bureau does not appear. 



226 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

nese citizenship amalgamate by intermarriage with 
the other races? These are questions of intense in- 
terest to all students of race problems. Although 
full statistics are not available; the following state- 
ments may be made: 

The maintenance thus far by Japanese in the 
Hawaiian Islands of the purity of their race stock 
is one of the remarkable facts that merits considera- 
tion. The report of the registrar-general for 1914 
classifies by race the marriages of the year. Of 
3,149 marriages, 1,806 are Japanese- Japanese. One 
Japanese bride married an American and another 
married a Spaniard. One Japanese man married a 
Caucasian-Hawaiian, and 3 Japanese men married 
pure Hawaiians. That is to say: 6 Japanese 
married out of their race to twice 1,806 Japanese 
men and women that married within their race. 
These figures are in marked contrast to the inter- 
marriage of the other races. Of 210 American men 
who married, 112 married American brides, the re- 
maining 98 marrying brides of other races; 11 
married pure Hawaiians, 25 married Caucasian- 
Hawaiians, 3 married pure Chinese, and 4 married 
Chinese-Hawaiians. Out of 102 Chinese men, 31 
married pure Hawaiians and 9 married Chinese- 
Hawaiian women, only 58 marrying women of pure 
Chinese blood. While 1,806 Japanese women mar- 
ried Japanese men, only 2 married out of their race. 
Out of 806 brides of pure American, British, Ha- 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 227 

waiian, Portuguese, and Spanish blood, 206 married 
grooms of other races than their own. 

Statistics for 1915 and 1916 reveal the same gen- 
eral tendencies. For the year ending June 30, 1915, 
out of a total of 2,730 men who married, 1,413 were 
Japanese. Of these, 1,409 married Japanese brides 
and 4 married Hawaiians. Only one Japanese 
woman married out of her race, she becoming the 
bride of a Caucasian-Hawaiian. In contrast to these 
facts are those dealing with American marriages. 
Out of 212 American men who married, 83 married 
American brides, while 33 married Caucasian-Ha- 
waiians, 22 married Hawaiians, and 44 married Por- 
tuguese. Of American women, 4 married Caucasian- 
Hawaiians and one married a Portuguese. 

In 1916 there were 1,314 Japanese men who mar- 
ried, of whom 1,305 married Japanese brides, while 
5 married Hawaiians and 4 married Portuguese. 
Of 223 American men, however, only 113 married 
American brides, while 30 married Caucasian-Ha- 
waiians, 11 married Hawaiians, and 42 married Por- 
tuguese. While 3 Japanese women out of 1,308 
married outside of their race, out of 132 American 
brides, 10 married British, 4 married Caucasian- 
Hawaiians, and 2 married Hawaiians. 

Considerable inquiry has led the writer to infer 
that out of the whole number of Japanese families 
in the Territory, possibly as high as 30,000, there 
must be less than 100 cases in which the mothers 



228 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

are Hawaiians. When Hawaiian-born and reared 
Japanese children begin to marry, it is doubtful if 
these tendencies will be maintained. 

There is general agreement in the opinion that on 
most of the plantations no regular prostitution now 
exists, and also that the Japanese are more free 
from venereal diseases than any other race. Some 
of the physicians and managers made amazingly 
strong statements on this point. In the city of 
Honolulu, however, the situation seems to be re- 
versed, Japanese prostitutes being found in rela- 
tively large numbers. A recent investigation of the 
red-light district showed that out of 107 prostitutes, 
82 were Japanese. 

Turning now to the social conditions of the Japa- 
nese the following statements may be made : 

Examination in detail of more than a dozen 
"camps" showed that that name should be aban- 
doned. They are villages rather than camps. A 
few plantations still use some of the old barracks. 
As a rule, however, they have been entirely given 
up. Each family has a home for itself. If the 
family is small, it has two rooms and a kitchen, two 
homes being covered by a single roof. Large fami- 
lies have an entire building. Each house has its 
own plot of ground. In many cases these are cul- 
tivated, but the custom is still far from universal. 
The apparent indifference of so many Japanese 
families to the appearance of their homes, whether 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 229 

within or without, is a matter of surprise. Japanese 
in the Hawaiian Islands are distinctly inferior to 
Portuguese in this respect, though superior to Fili- 
pinos. Portuguese villages appear as a rule attrac- 
tive, being well provided with trees and flowers, 
while Japanese villages as a rule are unattractive. 
There is, however, much difference between the va- 
rious plantations in this respect. Much evidently 
depends on the plantation manager. 

Particular inquiry was made in regard to Japanese 
financial conditions. I learned that while work 
which lasted two years or more was given on regularly 
recorded contracts, agreements for work for shorter 
periods, for work namely that would be completed 
in the course of a few months, were merely verbal. 
The fine relations of mutual trust and good-will dis- 
played by this arrangement were highly impressive. 
The adjustment also of rates of payment, so that 
the laborer shares with the plantation the advantages 
or disadvantages of large or small crops, and also 
of high or low prices of sugar, evinced the desire of 
the managers to deal fairly with labor and also the 
confidence of labor in the honesty and fair dealing 
of the managers. 

The fact that while Filipinos, Portuguese, Porto 
Ricans, and others as a rule are given only day 
labor, the long-period, profitable contracts are given 
largely to Japanese, speaks volumes for the superior 
ability and fidelity of Japanese labor. 



230 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

The financial prosperity of the Japanese was also 
a cause of surprise. In addition to wages, every 
laborer is provided free of cost a house, tools, fuel, 
water, and medical treatment. During the past 
few years the housing arrangements have been 
greatly improved at a cost to the plantations of 
hundreds of thousands of dollars. Statements from 
Japanese workers show that while the minimum 
earnings for a year — receiving only day wages — 
amount to about $200, the total expenses of living 
for a single man amount to about $125, leaving 
thus a clear profit of $75. A man and wife with 2 
or 3 children earn at the minimum about $260 
and spend about $250, leaving only a small balance. 
Where a contract is taken the laborer still receives, 
free, house, fuel, etc. His income and savings de- 
pend on his energy and skill. A man and his wife 
can earn as much as from $50 to $80 per month. 
Exceptional cases run high. The highest earnings 
reported were those of two men who took a contract 
for the cultivation of a 25-acre field. The work 
was completed in 235 days, and for that period they 
received $1,856.50, being $3.95 per day each. 

The system of making payments on contracts as 
the work is accomplished and also of providing a 
yearly bonus for all laborers who remain through- 
out the year and work an average of twenty days 
per month proves still further the desire of the 
managers to deal helpfully with their labor. Re- 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 231 

ports (not complete) show that during three years 
(1912-1914) of the operation of the bonus system; 
the total amount distributed was over half a million 
dollars. The amount of the bonus depends on the 
average price of sugar for the entire year, and on 
the total earnings of the workmen for the year, a 
rather complex formula which, however, does not 
need to be explained here in detail. 

In 1912, 15,994 workmen received $335,732 or 
$20.99 per man. 

In 1913, 14,934 workmen received $48,716 or $3.26 
per man. 

In 1914, 15,985 workmen received $189,025 or 
$11.20 per man. 

In these years the total number of Japanese 
laborers on the sugar-plantations was respectively 
28,138, 24,711, and 24,732. Those who received a 
bonus, therefore, were more than half of the number 
employed. 

In 1915 and 1916 the bonus is understood to have 
been very large, but the figures are not at hand. 

The financial conditions of the Japanese must be 
looked at from several standpoints. Their deposits 
in the banks of Hawaii for the years 1914, 1915, and 
1916 were $1,386,788, $2,494,594, and $3,896,830 
respectively. Until 1912 Japanese sent home prac- 
tically all their savings. When they began to think 
they might remain permanently in Hawaii they 
began to place their savings in the banks. In addi- 



232 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

tion to the amounts on deposit, during the calendar 
year ending December 31, 1916, $1,110,753.33 
were sent to Japan through the post-office, the 
number of orders being 40,905, an average of $27 
to the order. 

As rapidly as Japanese can do so they establish 
their own independent farming and business enter- 
prises. Many of them start prematurely with in- 
sufficient experience and capital, and consequently 
fail. These disappear and are forgotten. Many, 
however, are succeeding. The report of the Gov- 
ernor of Hawaii, June 30, 1916, gives the number of 
independent business enterprises of the different 
races for the two principal cities. 





Honolulu 


HiLO 


Hawaiian and others 


22 
45 

286 

673 
754 


13 
25 

48 

64 
248 


Portuguese 


American 1 

British } 


German J 

Chinese 


Japanese 




1,780 


398 



These figures, however, do not give the relative 
amounts of business done. Out of 14,060 taxpayers 
on real property there were only 911 Japanese, while 
out of 12,067 taxpayers on personal property there 
were 3,553 Japanese. The total assessed value of 
real and personal property was $207,000,000, of 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 233 

which Japanese owned only 2.1 per cent or $4,502,537 
worth. Out of 2,525 persons in Hawaii paying in- 
come tax there were only 70 Japanese and 35 Chi- 
nese, Anglo-Saxons numbering 179 and Hawaiians 
1,769. Corporations (388) paid 87.01 per cent of 
the income tax, Hawaiians paying 11.57 per cent, 
Anglo-Saxons 0.84 per cent, and Japanese 0.22 per 
cent. 

The savings-bank accounts of Japanese (June 30, 
1916) numbered 5,312, with a total of $510,829.89, 
being an average of $96.16 each. Chinese savings- 
bank accounts numbered 2,197, with a total of 
$660,234.46, giving the remarkable average of 
$300.51. 

A question constantly asked concerns the ten- 
dency of Japanese children bom in the islands to 
remain on the plantations. In Hawaii and Maui 
the invariable answer was that only a few do so; 
the large majority leave for Honolulu and seek an 
easier life than that of their parents. In Kauai 
and Oahu, however, many young people are taking 
up plantation work. Managers on the former 
islands regarded (1915) with anxiety the future of 
the labor supply. They expressed a desire for fresh 
immigration from Japan and China, while those on 
Kauai had no such anxiety or desire. 

Important light is thrown on the question as to 
what kiad of citizens Hawaiian-born Japanese are 
to make, by considering the fine school system 



234 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

of the Territorial government. Efficient American 
teachers are doing truly missionary work in all 
parts of the islands. Children of all the races are 
together learning not only the three r's but the 
English language, the essentials of American his- 
tory, and the principles of American democracy. 
They play together and together they sing our 
patriotic songs and learn to repeat choice quota- 
tions from our best statesmen — Washington, Frank- 
lin, Hamilton, Jefferson, Roosevelt. Flag-raising 
and observance of national holidays is an important 
part of school work. 

In this connection the educational statistics on op- 
posite page are important. 

A summary statement of other tables given by the 
Superintendent of Education shows that of the total 
number of pupils in the schools in 1916 (39,024), 
32,278 were in pubHc and 6,746 were in private 
schools, which follow the same curriculum. Of the 
14,440 Japanese children, 13,382 were in the pubhc 
schools and 1,058 were in private schools. The 
number of pubhc and private schools was 169 and 
51 respectively, giving a total of 220. 

Of the teachers (total, 1,171) 99 were Hawaiian, 
233 part Hawaiian, 561 American, 55 Chinese, and 
23 Japanese. Excepting the Americans, practically 
all the other teachers had been trained in the Nor- 
mal School. 

The percentage of attendance of pupils for 1916 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 235 



PUPILS IN THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS 
OF HAWAII 





1900 


1901 


1902 


1903 


1904 


1905 


1906 


1907 


1908 


Hawaiian. . 

Part Ha- 
waiian. . . 

American. . 

British .... 

German. . . 

Portuguese 

Scandina- 
vian 

Japanese. . . 

Cliinese. . . . 

Porto Rican 

Korean. . . . 

Spanish 

Russian. . . . 

Filipino. . . . 

Other For- 
eigners. . 


4,977 

2,631 
699 
232 
320 

3,809 

l,i52 
1,289 

229 


4,903 

2,869 
812 
240 
337 

4,124 

i",993 

1,385 

596 

260 


5,076 

2,934 
796 
215 
333 

4,335 

2^341 

1,499 

593 

260 


4,803 

3,018 
799 
217 
295 

4,243 

2[521 

1,554 

538 

337 


4,983 

3,267 
931 
226 
252 

4,448 

31313 

1.875 
437 

285 


4,943 

3,430 
1,025 

268 

298 

4,683 

3l869 

2,087 

405 

636 


4,906 

3,500 

1,009 

187 

273 

4,437 

82 

4,547 

2,197 

392 

161 

199 


4.658 

3,546 
937 
220 
295 

4,537 

81 

5,035 

2,548 

368 

210 

652 


4,767 

3,691 
999 
189 
265 

4,777 

67 

6,095 

2,797 

447 

168 

694 


15,537 


17,519 


18,382 


18.415 


20,017 


21,644 


21,890 


23,087 


24,856 




1909 


1910 


1911 


1912 


1913 


1914 


1915 


1916 


Hawaiian 


4,536 
3,841 
1,057 
185 
263 
4,727 

6!758 

2,840 

381 

248 

"579 


4,354 
3,718 
1,056 
152 
261 
4,890 

7i262 

2,872 

350 

270 

"685 


4,301 
4,060 
1,191 
134 
316 
5,153 

sieoo 

3,184 
332 
339 

'865 


4,370 
4,182 
1,232 
173 
275 
6,580 

lbi288 
3,839 
653 
390 
592 
116 
169 
411 


4,179 
4,108 
1.447 
161 
269 
5,521 

10^976 
3,625 
774 
399 
1,037 
157 
286 
200 


3,963 
4,482 
1,440 
145 
299 
5,780 

12;9i7 
3,886 
855 
460 
1,069 
144 
367 
181 


4,011 
4,652 
1,561 
144 
260 
6,973 

14!324 
4.008 
963 
612 
1,008 
159 
490 
164 


3,914 
4,918 
1,795 
144 
281 
6,012 

14^440 
4,070 
1,057 
518 
940 
156 
552 
227 


Part Hawaiian. . . 
American 


British 




Portuguese 


Scandinavian 

Japanese 


Chinese 


Porto Rican 

Korean 


Spanish 

Russian 

Filipino 

Other Foreigners. . 






25,410 


25,770 


28,615 


32,300 


33,139 


35,988 


38,229 


39.024 



was 94.3. The spelling-test for the ten largest 
schools was 92 per cent. This is 6 per cent higher 
than the speUing-test of 84 schools in the cities of 
Continental United States, which followed the 
Russell Sage Foundation system of tests. Besides 



236 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

the Normal School, there are four high schools, the 
total enrolment of which is approximately 1,000. 

Vocational education has made great strides in all 
these schools in recent years, carpentry, cooking, 
and agriculture receiving special attention in scores 
of the larger schools. 

Students of the Japanese problem in Hawaii will 
pay special attention to the "Japanese schools." 
On the occasion of my investigation (1915) I visited 
many of them and was surprised at their number, 
equipment, and fine locations. These facts are pro- 
ducing anxiety on the part of some Americans, who 
look upon these schools as part of a scheme of the 
Japanese Government to retain its hold on the 
Japanese population of the islands in order finally 
to annex them to the empire of Japan. An adequate 
understanding of the situation, however, wiU, I be- 
lieve, remove these anxieties and suspicions. The 
following is a brief statement of the saHent facts in 
the case. 

Until the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands by 
the United States practically all laboring Japanese 
arriving in the islands came on three-year contracts. 
On completion of the contracts the vast majority 
returned to Japan. Upon annexation (1898) the 
contract system was abolished. Laborers then came 
as freemen, but still with no thought of permanent 
residence. Gradually, however, there came into 
being a community of Japanese who found them- 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 237 

selves staying on from year to year, business oppor- 
tunities and prospects being better in the islands 
than in Japan. Japanese women — wives — then be- 
gan to come in increasing numbers. Japanese 
children in the pubKc and private schools numbered 
only 1;352 m 1900. In 1906, however, they equalled 
the number of Hawaiian and Portuguese children. 
Since that date they have been passing far beyond 
them. 

All Japanese in Hawaii were until about 1910 or 
1912 expecting sooner or later to return to their 
native land. Many of them had been sending their 
children home to the grandparents. To their 
astonishment and sorrow they began to discover 
that their children were not Japanese in tempera- 
ment, language, manners, or tastes. They could 
neither read nor write Japanese, and could not enter 
Japanese schools. Even in the islands, in propor- 
tion as the children advanced in the Territorial 
schools, the parents found themselves getting out 
of touch with their own children. The children 
were learning a language and acquiring ideas that 
the parents knew nothing of. They could not even 
talk freely with their children. 

As one Japanese expressed it, "the mother was 
like a hen with ducklings." With the confident 
expectation of returning eventually to Japan with 
their children, "Japanese schools became an absolute 
necessity." They sprang up all over the islands 



238 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

(between 1905-1910), largely by the energy of Bud- 
dhist priests, who took advantage of the new situa- 
tion to bind the Japanese population to their 
shrines and temples by rendering a real service. 
The Hawaiian planters, moreover, in order to retain 
their Japanese labor, assisted these Japanese schools 
by substantial financial grants. 

Those schools had their exercises usually for one 
hour before and for two hours after the pubHc 
schools. According to the report of Governor Pink- 
ham (1916) the number of these schools in 1915 
was 112, and the number of the children attending 
them was 11,216. The aim of these schools has not 
.been to displace the pubHc-school system, but only 
to teach the children their native language, history, 
customs, and ideals. It was perfectly natural that 
the inculcation of patriotism for Japan and loyalty 
to the Emperor should also be a part of their pro- 
gramme and purpose. 

By 1910-1912 this situation began to attract the 
attention and arouse the anxiety of Americans. 
They reahzed that these thousands of Japanese 
boys were American-born citizens; they saw them 
being trained for loyalty to Japan — ^implying dis- 
loyalty to America. Far-seeing, fair-minded, and 
intelHgent Japanese saw the justice of the American 
contention. By 1915 a great change, as we have 
seen, had come over the vast majority of the Jap- 
anese. Their children, thousands of them well on 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 239 

in their teens, had no desire of returning to Japan — 
a strange country and disagreeable in many aspects. 
"To reside permanently in Hawaii is now the popu- 
lar cry among the Japanese in Hawaii," writes a 
Japanese correspondent. "This change has, taken 
place within the past five or six years." 

In consequence of this change the situation in the 
Japanese schools has been undergoing important 
transformation. The Japanese text-books have been 
revised, the effort being to remove those features 
that might be regarded by Americans as teaching 
disloyalty to the United States. A few Japanese in 
Japan have become indignant over the changes on 
the ground that the new text-books teach disloyalty 
to the Emperor. 

The total outcome of this movement is clear and 
will be satisfactory if it is handled wisely by Ameri- 
cans. The Japanese in Hawaii — especially the ris- 
ing generation — who are better acquainted with the 
English language and with American history and 
ideals than they are with the Japanese language, 
history, and ideals, will not long tolerate Japanese 
schools. Parents will not long continue to support 
or to compel their children to attend them. New 
immigration from Japan has become negligible. 
Before long the children of Hawaiian-bom Japanese 
will begin to appear who will know little or nothing 
of their ancestral tongue. 

A keen Japanese, long resident in the Hawaiian 



240 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

Islands, makes this forecast in a personal letter. 
"As the stars disappear one by one before the dawn, 
so will the Japanese schools in Hawaii. Within 
the next ten or fifteen years there will probably re- 
main only one or two such schools in Hilo and 
Honolulu. But even they will not be for children, 
but for those who wish to have conmiercial relations 
with Japan. Buddhists will, of course, maintain 
their schools in order to keep their hold on the chil- 
dren, just as the Roman CathoHcs are doing in the 
United States and Hawaii; but I beHeve that the 
instruction will be given in English and not in Jap- 
anese." 

At the time of my investigation (1915) I visited 
quite a number of these Japanese schools. The 
teachers in the non-religious and Jodo Buddhist 
schools appeared to be fair-minded, intelligent men, 
having some real appreciation of their problem and 
a desire to solve it to the mutual advantage of the 
Hawaiian Islands and their Japanese constituency. 
The priest teachers of the Shinshu (Hongwanji) 
Buddhist schools did not make a like impression 
upon me. The presence of these schools, with the 
temples and shrines of two or three of the most 
superstitious sects of Japanese Buddhism (Shingon 
and Daishi), may well cause anxiety to patriotic 
Americans. 

Many of these Japanese teachers are old-fashioned 
Buddhist priests, belated and reactionary even from 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 241 

the standpoint of Japanese in Japan, wholly un- 
acquainted with English; and out of sympathy with 
American institutions. It is not fitting that they 
should be allowed to stand as teachers of American 
youth. The solution for this difficulty would seem 
to be a Territorial law to the effect that teachers in 
aU schools in the Territory, private as well as public, 
must qualify in certain specified matters, such as 
knowledge of English, American history, methods 
of government, and ideals of democracy. Every 
teacher should hold a certificate from the Board of 
Education. Such a law would practically force the 
Japanese schools to employ progressive Japanese. 
It is a question, moreover, whether the plantations 
should be allowed to subsidize Japanese schools 
whose teachers and policies tend to obstruct the 
Americanization of their pupils. Serious problems 
are ahead unless Hawaiian-born Japanese are pretty 
thoroughly Americanized. 

These general conditions described above are also 
producing important changes of attitude among Jap- 
anese as to the question of securing American citi- 
zenship. Whereas until recently few thought of it 
or cared for it, many are now seriously considering 
the disabiHties under which they live, alienated from 
Japan by their life here, and yet unable to acquire 
American citizenship. Desire for American citizen- 
ship has developed rapidly during the past four or 
five years, greatly stimulated by the addresses and 



242 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

advice given by such Japanese visitors as Messrs. 
Hattori; Ebara, Soyeda, and Ibuka and others, who 
in 1913 visited the United States at the time of the 
California Anti-AHen Legislation. 

Among the questions I constantly put to planta- 
tion managers and others who have direct dealings 
with Japanese was one as to their opinion of the 
capacity of Japanese for intelligent; high-minded, and 
loyal citizenship. With but few exceptions the re- 
phes were prompt and favorable. A few stated 
emphatically that Japanese as a whole would make 
better citizens than the majority of those who are 
now citizens. 

The large majority of those interviewed do not 
look forward with anxiety to the time when the 
thousands of Hawaiian-born Japanese boys shall ex- 
ercise their rights of suffrage. Several expressed the 
thought that there would be real advantage because 
of such a class of voters. 

A recent development throwing much light on the 
question of Americanization of Hawaiian-born Japa- 
nese is the formation of "Japanese American Citizen- 
ship Associations" in several centres such as Hono- 
lulu, Hilo, and Kauai. The Honolulu association 
has a membership of 70, while that at Hilo has as 
many as 90. The Y. M. C. A. at Honolulu has a 
citizenship club of English-speaking Japanese which 
numbers 60, of whom one-half were born in Hawaii, 
and the other half in Japan. The purpose of these 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 243 

associations is the promotion of good-citizenship 
habits among the new voters now rapidly develop- 
ing among the Japanese population. 

The association at Kauai is, however, the most 
active and interesting. It holds classes at twelve 
different points in the island, averaging a dozen 
members each. A remarkable feature is that the 
members pay a fee of one dollar per month and 
the teachers receive regular payment for their work. 
This association was organized July 4, 1917, with an 
initial membership of 50. A fine photograph of the 
group reveals them as well-dressed, ambitious, ener- 
getic American youth. A few of the members were 
accepted as associates because, born in Japan, they 
could not become voting citizens. 

The number of Japanese votsrs is still small. 
According to the report of the Chamber of Com- 
merce (December 31, 1916), the Hawaiian and part 
Hawaiian registered voters numbered 10,713, Amer- 
icans, 3,284, Portuguese, 2,610, Chinese, 777, British, 
648, and Japanese, 179, all others numbering 648 — 
a total of 18,981. On registration day of 1917, 
according to the Friend 596 Japanese registered 
preliminary to voting on November 6. In ten 
years there will be a substantial Japanese voting 
population. Shall they be definitely trained for 
good citizenship by intelligent presentation of the 
ideals and practices of democracy, or will they be 
left to drift into partisan or race politics as have 



244 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

the naturalized and American-born citizens of 
Irish, Hebrew, and other peoples from Europe? 

There are encouraging signs that the political 
leaders of Hawaii are awake to the problem and are 
grappling earnestly and effectively with the new 
situation developing through the oncoming thousands 
of Hawaiian-bom Japanese citizens. 

Americans will naturally ask what the attitude 
and action of these Hawaiian-born Japanese Amer- 
ican citizens would be in case of war with Japan. 
Would they be genuine American or primarily Jap- 
anese — ^hyphenates? 

In this connection it is important to note what the 
Japanese themselves say. Again I may refer to the 
teaching of the moralists of Old Japan, now repeated- 
ly emphasized, that the principle of Bushido, the 
way of the warrior, which emphasizes loyalty, would 
require Japanese who are American citizens to fight 
for America. Every Japanese who speaks or says 
anything on these matters takes this ground. 

On the occasion of the formation of the associa- 
tion at Hilo, referred to above. Reverend S. Sokabe, 
who made the principal address, used these words, 
which are characteristic of the spirit of the entire 
speech: "American-born and naturalized Japanese 
are no longer bound to Japan, are no longer her sub- 
jects. They are subjects of the United States and 
should prove true and loyal to her. You, American 
Japanese, are bound to the Stars and Stripes, and 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 245 

should unite in loyalty for Hawaii and America. 
Should emergency arise, offer yourselves as did 
Patrick Henry and Israel Putnam patriotically to 
the State, and thus guard and maintain the pros- 
perity of your coimtry, the United States of Amer- 
ica." 

Information has been received that since the 
United States declared war on Germany many 
Japanese have taken marked interest in the Na- 
tional Guard. In Honolulu, on August 16, 77 
American-born Japanese enlisted and were organ- 
ized into Company D of the first regiment, the first 
unit of American troops of Japanese race imder the 
American flag, their officers being Americans. 

A question asked by many concerns the number 
of foreign-bom Japanese who would qualify and be- 
come naturalized in case the laws should allow it. 
In seeking a reply, we must bear several facts in 
mind. The "gentlemen's agreement" went into 
effect in 1908; at that date there were in Hawaii 
some 54,000 Japanese males; since then, as we have 
already seen, some 7,000 more Japanese men have 
left the islands than have entered. We must also 
remember that the vast majority of Japanese in the 
islands are peasants with exceedingly limited educa- 
tion in their own language. Considering how diffi- 
cult it is for Americans to learn Japanese, we gain 
some idea as to the difficulty for a Japanese to learn 
enough EngHsh to read a newspaper. In case Japa- 



246 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

nese should be granted privileges of naturalization, 
they would have to acquire a definite standard of 
English. Remembering that the vast majority of 
Japanese men in the islands are laborers and that 
their opportunity and time and capacity for study 
are of the lowest, I conclude that in all probabihty 
not five per cent could possibly qualify. 

I venture the "guess" that in five years not more 
than 2,000 to 2,500 Japanese men bom in Japan 
would have fulfilled the conditions and become 
American citizens by naturaHzation. 

No study of the Japanese situation in Hawaii 
would be adequate that did not take full account of 
the Christian movement among them. Soon after 
Japanese began to come in considerable numbers to 
the Hawaiian Islands, American Christians started 
evangehstic work especially for Japanese. Even 
before the close of the last century the Hawaiian 
mission board established a Japanese section, se- 
curing Reverend 0. H. Gulick to become its super- 
intendent. Bom in Hawaii of missionary parents, 
and a master of its language, he had spent nearly 
twenty-five years in Japan in missionary service 
and was therefore peculiarly fitted for the task of 
introducing Americans, Hawaiians, and Japanese 
to each other. 

The work soon grew to such an extent that in 1900 
Doctor Doremus Scudder was called from a suc- 
cessful pastorate in Massachusetts. In preparing 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 247 

for his task he visited Japan, where he had spent 
five years as a missionary; he visited all those sec- 
tions of Japan from which Japanese laborers had 
gone to the islands. In response to his offer to 
carry letters to long-absent sons, he was deluged 
with some twenty thousand. On arrival in Hawaii 
he visited all the plantations and delivered the let- 
ters in person so far as possible. This was the be- 
ginning of a highly valuable relationship and se- 
cured appreciation by the Japanese of the Christian 
spirit of service and friendship. 

Individual Japanese soon began to respond to 
the Christian appeal. The building up of perma- 
nent churches, however, has been a highly difficult 
matter because of the constant shifting of the popu- 
lation from island to island, much of it also return- 
ing permanently to Japan. Since 1910, however, 
with the development of the new spirit among the 
Japanese and the decision on the part of many to 
remain permanently in the islands, the growth of the 
churches has been more steady and wholesome. 

According to the most recent statistics there are 
in the five islands 30 Japanese churches having a total 
membership of 2,149, and a Sabbath-school atten- 
dance of 2,779 children. The Japanese churches are 
served by a faithful, self-sacrificing group of some 
25 pastors and evangehsts, men of rare spirit and 
consecration, who could easily double and treble 
their income were they to enter on business careers. 



248 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

The American superintendent of the Japanese work 
has for some years been Reverend Frank Scudder, 
who also rendered missionary service in Japan of 
ten or a dozen years. No more important factor 
is at work in the Americanizing of Japanese in the 
islands than that of the Christian gospel with the 
ideals which it presents of God and man, husband and 
wife, parents and children, the dignity of labor, and 
emphasizing as it does the sacredness of all the social 
and racial relations and duties. 

The civilization and social order of America is 
essentially Christian. Those foreigners who become 
genuine Christians are much more likely to become 
loyal American citizens than those foreigners who 
cling to their ancestral faiths and superstitions or, 
even if these are abandoned, become mere material- 
ists without religious ideas or convictions. 

As is now quite clear, the American Japanese 
problem in the Hawaiian Islands is quite unique. A 
relatively small American minority, about 15,000 all 
told, is seeking to Americanize vastly larger groups 
of diverse races. Biologically, of course, it is im- 
possible. Complete intermarriage of the races 
would in time completely swallow up the white. 
Hawaii's population in aU probability will become 
increasingly a mixture of Japanese, Chinese, Ha- 
waiian, and white, the pure bloods constituting a 
constantly diminishing proportion. There is, how- 
ever, reason for holding that if the matter is rightly 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 249 

handled, the entire population of the islands may 
gain such mastery of the English language, and may 
be so permeated with American ideas and ideals 
that the Territory of Hawaii may be as truly Amer- 
ican as any section of the mainland. To secure 
these results, however, not only the Territorial peo- 
ple and government must do their respective parts, 
but the federal government also must make its con- 
tribution. 

While at present, as we have seen above, out of 
18,981 enjoying the suffrage 10,713 are Hawaiian 
and part Hawaiian, and American voters number 
3,284, Portuguese 2,610, Chinese 777, and British 
648, yet within two or three decades Japanese will 
constitute the largest single body of voters. Chi- 
nese, Portuguese, and Filipinos will also constitute 
important groups. Shall these race groups be 
ranged in solid bodies contending selfishly for race 
rule and economic advantage, or shall they co- 
operate cordially for the general welfare on the 
basis of genuine democracy? These are not ques- 
tions of merely academic interest. They are highly 
practical and demand the best study of our best 
thinkers and the earnest activities of all good citi- 
zens of each of the races concerned. 

A few further facts may well be given as throwing 
light on the interesting question of Japanese develop- 
ment and place among the races contributing to the 
new race mixture arising in Hawaii. Of the five 



250 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

daily papers in Hawaii, three are Japanese and two 
are English. Of the seven weeklies, one is Japanese, 
two are English, two Hawaiian, and one is Portu- 
guese. There are three English semi-weekhes and 
one Korean. There are four Chinese tri-weeklies, 
and, as for the monthlies, there are four Japanese, 
one Chinese, seven English, two Korean, one FiHpino, 
and one Hawaiian. The number of publications to 
each language, therefore, is: EngHsh 14, Japanese 8, 
Chinese 5, Hawaiian 3, Korean 3, Portuguese 1, and 
Filipino 1. 

In the matter of criminality Japanese make an 
excellent record. While the average percentage of 
those convicted for the entire population was, in 
1915, 4.12 per cent, the criminaHty of the whites 
was 2.26 per cent, Japanese 2.39 per cent, Hawaiian 
3.02 per cent, Chinese 6.19 per cent, and of the rest 
13.12 per cent. Of those who appeared before the 
Juvenile Court, in spite of their large population the 
Japanese have the smallest figure to their discredit: 
Hawaiians 222, Chinese 103, Portuguese 90, and 
Japanese 51 for the boys, and for the girls the figures 
stand respectively 64, 11, 11, and 3. 

These facts show that the Japanese are an intelli- 
gent and also an orderly, law-respecting people — ■ 
which promises well for their wholesome co-opera- 
tion in democratic government. 

The Chinese situation in Hawaii is relatively 
simple, partly because their numbers are com- 



SITUATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS 251 

paratively small, and also partly because they are 
not aggressive like the Japanese and are not sup- 
ported by a wide-awake government, constantly 
looking out for the interests of its people. 

The Chinese population in Hawaii in 1900 was 
25,767, which feU to 21,674 in 1910, Of these, 
17,148 were males and 4,526 were females, of whom 
2,422 were girls under fifteen years of age. There 
were 421 unmarried women over 15 years of age 
and 1,555 were married women. In 1916 the esti- 
mated Chinese population was 21,954. The mar- 
riage of Chinese men with Hawaiian women has 
been going on for decades with results approved of 
all, for the offspring are generally regarded as su- 
perior to either parent, inheriting the good qualities 
of both. 



CHAPTER XrV 
CONCLUSION 

In the chapter dealing with our treatment of the 
Chinese, attention was called to the pledge of our 
government that in case of ill treatment "the 
United States will exert all its powers to devise 
measures for their protection and to secure to them 
the same rights and privileges, immunities, and 
exemptions as may be enjoyed by the citizens and 
subjects of the most favored nation." Thus far, 
Congress has ignored this promise. 

Now that the whole world begins to realize how 
important it is for a nation to keep with utmost care 
its treaty obligations, has not the time come for 
Congress to take the needed action ? 

In this matter, moreover, we are bound by numer- 
ous treaties with many other countries also respect- 
ing the rights of aHens. 

For example, the treaty of 1871 with Italy con- 
tains the following reciprocal pledges: 

"The citizens of each of the high contracting 
parties shall receive in the states and territories of 
the other the most constant protection and security 
for their persons and property, and shall enjoy in 
this respect the same rights and privileges as are or 

252 



CONCLUSION 253 

may be granted to the natives on their submitting 
themselves to the conditions imposed upon the 
natives." 

The personal and property rights of aliens have, 
nevertheless, been repeatedly violated, and, as a 
result, the friendly relations existing between the 
United States and foreign countries have been 
jeopardized. 

Honorable William H. Taft has given a list^ of 
seventy-three ahens of different nationalities lynched 
or murdered in other ways between 1885 and 1910, 
in addition to those who were wounded. Thou- 
sands have been driven from their homes and their 
property destroyed by lawless mobs. 

In all these cases the federal government has 
acknowledged its responsibility by paying indem- 
nities, but it has not been able either to give protec- 
tion in case of threatened danger or of prosecution of 
those who committed the crimes, owing to lack of 
legislation authorizing the federal authorities to 
take the needful actions. In support of this state- 
ment the words of four recent presidents are offered: 

President Harrison, just after the Mafia case at 
New Orleans in 1891, said: 

"It would, I believe, be entirely competent for 
Congress to make offenses against the treaty rights 
of foreigners domiciled in the United States cog- 
nizable in the federal courts. This has not, however, 

1 " The United States and Peace." 



254 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

been done, and the federal officers and courts have 
no power in such cases to intervene either for the 
protection of a foreign citizen or for the punishment 
of his slayers." 

President McKinley, in his annual message of 
December 5, 1899, used these words: 

"For the fourth time in the present decade the 
question has arisen with the government of Italy 
in regard to the lynching of Itahan subjects. The 
latest of these deplorable events occurred at Tallu- 
lah, Louisiana, whereby five unfortunates of Itahan 
origin were taken from jail and hanged. ... The 
recurrence of these distressing manifestations of 
blind mob fury, directed at dependents or natives of 
a foreign country, suggests that the contingency 
has arisen for action by Congress in the direction 
of conferring upon the federal courts jurisdiction in 
this class of international cases where the ultimate 
responsibility of the federal government may be 
involved." 

President Roosevelt, in his annual message of 
December, 1906, said: 

"One of the greatest embarrassments attending 
the performance of our international obhgations is 
the fact that the statutes of the United States are 
entirely inadequate. They fail to give to the na- 
tional government sufficiently ample power, through 
United States courts and by the use of the army and 
navy, to protect ahens in the rights secured to them 
under solemn treaties which are the law of the land. 
I therefore earnestly recommend that the criminal 
and civil statutes of the United States be so amended 



CONCLUSION 255 

and added to as to enable the President, acting for 
the United States Government, which is responsible 
in our international relations, to enforce the rights 
of ahens under treaties. There should be no par- 
ticle of doubt as to the power of the national govern- 
ment completely to perform and enforce its own 
obligations to other nations. The mob of a single 
city may at any time perform acts of lawless yiolence 
against some class of foreigners which would plunge 
us into war. That city by itseK would be powerless 
to make defense against the foreign power thus 
assaulted, and if independent of this government it 
would never venture to perform or permit the per- 
formance of the acts complained of. The entire 
power and the whole duty to protect the offending 
city or the offending community hes in the hands of 
the United States Government. It is unthinkable 
that we should continue a policy rnider which a 
given locaHty may be allowed to commit a crime 
against a friendly nation, and the United States 
Government limited, not to prevention of the com- 
mission of the crime, but, in the last resort, to de- 
fending the people who have committed it against 
the consequences of their wrongdoing." 

President Taft, in his inaugural address, March 
4, 1909, said: 

"By proper legislation we may, and ought to, 
place in the hands of the federal executive the means 
of enforcing the treaty rights of such ahens in the 
courts of the federal government. It puts our 
government in a pusillanimous position to make 
definite engagements to protect ahens and then to 
excuse the failure to perform those engagements by 
an explanation that the duty to keep them is in 



256 DEMOCRACY AND ASIATIC CITIZENSHIP 

States or cities not within our control. If we would 
promise we must put ourselves in a position to per- 
form our promise. We cannot permit the possible 
failure of justice, due to local prejudice in any State 
or municipal government; to expose us to the risk 
of a war, which might be avoided if federal jurisdic- 
tion was asserted by suitable legislation by Congress 
and carried out by proper proceedings instituted by 
the executive in the courts of the national govern- 
ment." 

In 1912 a bill was prepared and introduced into 
the House enabHng the federal government to 
execute its treaty obHgations for the protection of 
aUens resident in the United States. This bill, 
drafted by Honorable William H. Taft, himself, was 
endorsed by the American Bar Association. No 
action, however, was taken by Congress. It is diffi- 
cult to understand why Congress has so long failed 
to pass the necessary law. Is not the real reason the 
apathy of the responsible citizens of the United 
States in regard to international relations, responsi- 
biHties, and duties? 

In conclusion, then, we earnestly invite all those 
who sympathize with the view and proposals pre- 
sented in these pages to consider how they may most 
effectively co-operate for their reaHzation. 

What is now needed is a League for Constructive 
Immigration Legislation, composed of tens of thou- 
sands of citizens in all parts of the country, who will 
aid in the education of our people in these matters 



CONCLUSION 257 

of international duties and responsibilities, and who 
will bring such pressure to bear on the legislators 
at Washington as shall in time secure the enactment 
of the needed laws. In the briefest form these laws 
should enable the administration 

To give adequate federal protection to aliens resident 
in the United States; 

To restrict all immigration to such numbers from 
each people as we can really Americanize, and 

To give privileges of citizenship to every person who 
qualifies for it, regardless of his race. 



